[2024:RJ-JP:41292]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 180/2023 Jyoti Tripathi Owner/publisher/printer, M/s Tripathi Printers, Purani Nagar, Palika Ki Gali, Main Market Jhalrapatan, District Jhalawar, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus M/s Rajasthan Patrika Private Limited, JLN Marg, Kesargarh Jaipur Through Authorized Signatory Raghunath Singh, ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 181/2023 Jyoti Tripathi Owner/publisher/printer, M/s Tripathi Printers, Purani Nagar, Palika Ki Gali, Main Market Jhalrapatan, District Jhalawar, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus M/s Rajasthan Patrika Private Limited, JLN Marg, Kesargarh Jaipur Through Authorized Signatory Raghunath Singh, ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gunjan Pathak, Mr. Sameer Sharma, Mr. Aditya Bohra, Ms. Ishita Rawat, Mr. Kanishk Singhal, Ms. Priyanshi Roongta For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Mathur, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. G.D. Bansal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

26/09/2024

1. These two Civil Revision Petitions have been preferred by the petitioner-defendant, challenging the order dated 11.08.2023 passed in Suit No.53/2021 (M/s. Rajasthan Patrika Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

Jyoti Tripathi Swami) by the Court of Additional District Judge No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur, dismissing two separate applications of defendant: (i) Under Order 7 Rule 10 CPC read with Section 151 CPC; and (ii) Under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Section 151 CPC.

2. The contention of counsel for petitioner is that the present suit involves a commercial dispute in respect of Intellectual Property Right, which can be entertained by the Commercial Court only under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. However, during course of arguments, counsel for petitioner states that petitioner- defendant wants to raise objection in respect of improper determination / non-determination of the specified value of the infringement of the Intellectual Property Rights in the present suit before the trial Court and after determination of the specified value in relation to the commercial dispute, will raise the objection about non-maintainability of the present suit before the Civil Court since only the Commercial Court has jurisdiction to entertain and decide the suit in respect of commercial dispute of specified value of 3 lakhs or above.

3. Having considered the contention of counsel for petitioner and in view of the judgment delivered by the High Court of Delhi in case of Pankaj Ravjibhai Patel Vs. SSS Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd. [MANU/DE/7382/2023], without interfering with the impugned dated 11.08.2023, both revision petitions are allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner-defendant to raise objection before the Civil Court in respect of improper/ non- determination of the specified value of the subject matter in dispute in the present suit first and thereafter to raise his objection about maintainability of the present suit before the Civil Court, if need arises.

4. Accordingly, both revision petitions stand disposed of.

5. Stay applications and other pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /47-48 Powerd by TCPDF (w.tcpdf.org)