JUDGMENT

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

1. The appellant (hereinafter ‘MAAN’) has filed the present appeal, aggrieved by an order dated 07.12.2021 (hereinafter ‘the impugned order’) passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Court-02), Saket Courts - South District, New Delhi (hereinafter ‘the learned Trial Court’), whereby the application filed by the appellant (defendant) under Order VII Rules 10 and 11 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter ‘the CPC’), was dismissed.

2. The respondent, M/s Mindwave Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter ‘MINDWAVE’), filed a suit against MAAN, inter alia, seeking permanent injunction restraining MAAN from using the trademark “BUPROEX-N”. MINDWAVE claims to be the registered owner of the said trademark and it alleged unauthorized use of the said trademark by MAAN.

3. MINDWAVE, for the purpose of territorial jurisdiction of the learned Trial Court at Saket, pleaded as under:

“19. That this Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain the present suit arising out of the suit for infringement as Plaintiff is registered owner of the Trademark and Plaintiff is carrying on the business from the place within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court having principle office for sale, distribution &control within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Defendant is all set to launch the product under impugned trademark BUPROEX within the territorial jurisdiction of this court and in fact, is negotiating various traders within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court as a direct challenge to Plaintiff. The threat perceived by Plaintiff is also extended to the place within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. In the case of registered trademark section 134 of the Trademark Act. 1999, specifically confers the jurisdiction at the place where Plaintiff resides and carries on their business. Hence the Hon’ble Court has the jurisdiction to entertain and try the instant suit as the present suit is for infringement of the registered trademark of Plaintiff.”

(emphasis supplied)

4. However, MAAN took a preliminary objection and filed an application under Order VII, Rules 10 and 11 read with Section 151 of the CPC seeking return of the plaint due to lack of territorial jurisdiction and the alleged non-compliance by MINDWAVE, in terms of the directions/guidelines prescribed by this Court in the case of Amrish Aggarwal v. M/s Venus Home Appliances Pvt. Ltd.: 2019 SCC OnLine Del 9966. MAAN pleaded that MINDWAVE only has a sales office within the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Trial Court at Saket and the registered office of MINDWAVE is located in Mangol Puri Industrial area, which is outside the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Trial Court at Saket.

5. MAAN contended that even though the registered office of MINDWAVE has now been shifted to Neb Sarai, which is within the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Trial Court at Saket, however, at the material time when the suit was filed, the learned Trial Court at Saket had no territorial jurisdiction. MAAN further contended that a suit for injunction on the basis of mere apprehension cannot be maintained being without cause.

6. The learned Trial Court, after considering the rival contentions, dismissed the said application by the impugned order, which led to filing of the present appeal.

7. The learned Trial Court had held as under:

“21. Indisputably, the plaintiff company had office at Neb Sarai at the time of filing of the suit, so if a company has a sales office even if not a registered office, it would be difficult to dispute that plaintiff company carried on its business at that place as well. In this view of the matter support can be obtained from L'oreal Vs. Dushyant Shah, the decision of our High Court reported as MANU/DE/4389/2011. Quia Timet action is when plaintiff apprehends infringement even if defendant had not commenced operation, the right of the plaintiff to maintain cause of action on account of apprehension of infringement