Naivedya Associates Vs Kriti Nutrients Ltd (2021): Not Much Scope For Considering Territorial Jurisdiction Issue In A Transfer Petition U/S 25 Of CPC

DATE OF JUDGEMENT:
4th August 2021

JUDGES:
Justice Aniruddha Bose

PARTIES:
Naivedya Associates……………….. (Petitioner)
M/s Kriti Nutrients Ltd………….. (Respondent)

SUBJECT

The Supreme Court held that there is not much scope of going into the question of “territorial jurisdiction” of a court in a transfer petition under Section 25 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.

AN OVERVIEW

• In the present case, the petitioner, who is a defendant in the suit instituted in the Court of the District Judge, Shahdara, Karkardooma Court, New Delhi, has alleged infringement of the trademark and copyright.
• The transfer petition was filed before the Apex Court and the only contention that was raised was that both the parties hailed from the State of Madhya Pradesh and no cause of action had arisen within the jurisdiction of the District Court in Shahdara.

RELEVANT PROVISIONS

Civil Procedure Code,1908

Section 25: Power of Supreme Court to transfer suits, etc.

1. On the application of a party, and after notice to the parties, and after hearing such of them as a desire to be heard, the Supreme Court may, at any stage, if satisfied that an order under this Section is expedient for the ends of justice, direct that any suit, appeal or other proceeding be transferred from a High Court or other Civil Court in one State to a High Court or other Civil Court in any other State.
2. Every application under this Section shall be made by a motion which shall be supported by an affidavit.
3. The Court to which such suit, appeal or other proceeding is transferred shall, subject to any special directions in the order of transfer, either retry it or proceed from the stage at which it was transferred to it.
4. In dismissing any application under this Section, the Supreme Court may, if it is of opinion that the application was frivolous or vexatious, order the applicant to pay by way of compensation to any person who has opposed the application such sum, not exceeding two thousand rupees, as it considers appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
5. The law applicable to any suit, appeal or other proceeding transferred under this Section shall be the law which the Court in which the suit, appeal or other proceeding was originally instituted ought to have applied to such suit, appeal or proceeding.

ISSUES

• Whether, in the transfer petition, there is any scope of going into the question of territorial jurisdiction.

ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT

• Section 25 of the CPC empowers the Supreme Court to transfer a suit, appeal/other proceedings from the High Court /other civil courts in one state to the High Court / other Civil Court of another state.
• Firstly, the Bench clarified that in a transfer petition, there is no scope of going into the question of whether the court in which the suit is instituted has the territorial jurisdiction to try or determine the suit or not. The point is required to be urged before the court in which the suit is pending.
• Lastly, if the defendant is aggrieved on the point of lack of jurisdiction, it is open for the petitioner (defendant in the said suit) to raise a grievance before the court in which the suit has been instituted.
• Therefore, the Court had declined the petition for transfer of the said suit.

CONCLUSION

The Bench, after the observation, disposed of the transfer petition and ordered that the pending application, if there is any, shall also stand disposed of.

Click here to download the original copy of the judgement