BEFORE THE XVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AT BENGALURU
O.S.7013/2023
BETWEEN:
SANKALP CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED …Petitioner
(By Advocate, Shri Sivaraman Vaidyanathan for Petitioner)
AND
1) MYSANKALP DREAMNEST PRIVATE LIMITED
2) SANKALP SINGH SOLANKI …Respondents
(By Advocate, Mr. Chaluvaraja G.V. represents M/s. M.G. Kumar Law firm.)
Order on Preliminary issue.
Advocate for plaintiff filed Memo stating that the specified value of the suit as per Section 12(d) of Commercial Court Act, is more than Rs.3 lakhs.
Heard advocate for plaintiff and advocate for defendant Sri. Chaluvaraja G.V. on preliminary issue.
The preliminary issue is as under:
1) Whether the plaintiff proves that this Court has got pecuniary jurisdiction to try and entertain the suit?
This suit is filed by the plaintiff for injunction stating that defendant is infringing the trademark of the plaintiff ‘SANKALP’ and restraining the defendant from using the offending trademark ‘My Sankalp’
Section 2(c)(xvii) of Commercial Act, defines Commercial Dispute as under:
Commercial dispute means a dispute arising out of:-
(xvii) Intellectual Property rights relating to registered and unregistered trademarks, copyright, patent, design, domain names, geographical indications and semiconductor integrated circuits.
So, the dispute involved in this suit is commercial dispute as per Section 2(c)(xvii) of Commercial Court Act, i.e., suit is with respect to infringement of trademark.
As per section 2(i) of Commercial Court Act, which is amended with effect from 03.05.2018, the Commercial Court will get the jurisdiction if subject matter of the suit exceeds Rs.3 lakhs.
As per section 12(d) of Commercial Court Act, plaintiff has filed specified value of the suit as above Rs.3 lakhs.
So, this Court can try the commercial dispute if the specified value of the suit is less than Rs.3 lakhs. In this suit, the specified value of the suit is above Rs.3 lakhs. Hence, this Court has no pecuniary jurisdiction to try and entertain the suit.
Hence, I answer the preliminary issue in Negative.
In view of my answer to preliminary issue in negative, this court has no pecuniary jurisdiction to try and entertain the suit.
Advocate for plaintiff filed a memo to transfer this case to Commercial Court and also produced illustrative order sheet passed by this court in OS No. 2570/2020.
Advocate for defendant submitted that this court cannot transfer the suit but plaintiff has to be returned.
As per section 15(2) of Commercial Court Act all suits pending in any Civil Courts with respect to commercial dispute shall be transferred to such commercial court. Except the case is posted for judgment. This case is not posted for judgment.
As per this provision all pending cases have to be transferred but the amendment with respect to pecuniary jurisdiction of the court was came in to effect on 03.05.2018. So, the suits pending as on that date shall be transferred.
This suit was filed on 20.10.2023 i.e. after amendment. So, this suit was not pending as on the date of amendment. Hence this court cannot transfer the suit but plaint has to be returned as per Order 7 Rule 10 of the CPC.
In illustrative case submitted by the plaintiff the memo was not opposed by the defendant but in this case advocate for defendant has opposed the transfer of the case.
The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CRP No. 487/2023 between Sawan Media Limited Vs. Sri Hamsalekha and others dt. 08.04.2024 held as under;
“If at all the Trial Court finds that, it is a Commercial Dispute, then it is at liberty to return the plaint to file the same in proper jurisdiction court”.
The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CRP No. 426/2023 between M/s BTV Kannada Priviate Limited Vs. M/s Eaglesight Media Private Limited and ors., dt. 07.06.2024 (Reportable case) held as under;
“However, as the Learned senior counsel on a specific query by the court submits that the specified value of the movable and immovable properties exceeds Rs. 3 Lakhs. Hence instead of rejecting the plaint, this court directs the return of the plaint to enable the plaintiff to present the suit before the jurisdictional “Commercial Court” by complying the other formalities of the plaint mandated under the Act of 2015”.
Hence, by applying the above said citations and by applying Order 7 Rule 10 of the CPC this court holds that the plaint has to be returned and case cannot be transferred.
Hence acting Order 7 Rule 10A of the CPC, the plaint is returned to the plaintiff with a direction to present the same before Commercial Court of Bengaluru, Urban.
Both parties to the suit shall appear before Commercial Court on 28-09-2024 without expecting notice from said court.
Office is directed to return the plaint along with documents to the plaintiff on proper identification.
30/08/2024
XVIII ACC & SJ, Bengaluru.