Delhi High Court Dismisses Jurisdiction Challenge in Sun Pharma's Trademark Infringement Case Against Artura Pharmaceuticals

Court to Decide Jurisdiction as Preliminary Issue During Trial in Internet-Based Trademark Dispute

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court has dismissed an application filed by Artura Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., which sought the return of the plaint filed by Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. due to an alleged lack of territorial jurisdiction. The case involves a suit for the infringement of trademarks and passing off, where Sun Pharma claims that Artura's use of the marks 'PEPFIX' and 'NEOVITAL' is deceptively similar to its registered trademarks 'PEPFIZ' and 'REVITAL'.

The judgment, delivered by Justice Tejas Karia, focused on the determination of territorial jurisdiction in the context of internet-based disputes. The central issue was whether Artura's website, which contains a "Contact Us" page and a nutritional supplement brochure mentioning the disputed marks, established sufficient prima facie jurisdiction in Delhi. The Court held that the accessibility of Artura's website to consumers in Delhi, coupled with the potential for confusion or deception among Delhi consumers, justified the Court's jurisdiction at this stage.

The Court emphasized that objections to jurisdiction, particularly in internet-based trademark disputes, involve mixed questions of law and fact that require examination at the trial stage. It noted that the "Contact Us" page on Artura's website, which invites users to write for services, constitutes a purposeful targeting of consumers, including those in Delhi. Additionally, the listing of the disputed marks on a third-party website, which facilitates trade opportunities and promotes pharmaceutical products, further supports the argument for jurisdiction in Delhi.

The Court dismissed Artura's application under Order VII Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, which sought the return of the plaint for lack of jurisdiction. Instead, it reserved the right for Artura to raise the jurisdictional issue as a preliminary issue during the trial, allowing both parties to lead evidence on the factual aspects of the case.

This decision underscores the complexity of determining jurisdiction in cases involving internet activities and highlights the Court's approach in allowing the matter to proceed to trial, where a comprehensive examination of the evidence can take place.

Bottom Line:

Territorial jurisdiction in internet-based Trade Mark disputes can be determined by considering the accessibility and interactivity of the impugned website, the presence of "Contact Us" page inviting users for services, and the likelihood of confusion or deception among consumers within the forum state's jurisdiction.

Statutory provision(s): Trade Marks Act, 1999, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order VII Rule 10

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Artura Pharmaceuticals P. Ltd., (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2812438