Not Much Scope For Considering ‘Territorial Jurisdiction’ Issue In A Transfer Petition U/s 25 CPC: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court observed 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 Code of Civil Procedure. This point is required to be urged before the Court in which the suit is pending, Justice Aniruddha Bose observed while dismissing a transfer petition. In this case, the petitioner is a defendant in a suit instituted in the Court of District Judge, Shahdara, Karkardooma Court, New Delhi alleging infringement of trademark and copyright. In the transfer petition filed before the Apex Court, his only contention was that both the parties hail from the State of Madhya Pradesh and no cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of the District Court of Shahdara. “This is the only point urged before me at the time of hearing. In these circumstances, I do not think there is much scope of going into the question of as to whether the Court in which the suit is instituted has territorial jurisdiction to try and determine the suit or not in a petition for transfer of a suit invoking Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This point is required to be urged before the Court in which the suit is pending. I accordingly decline the plea of the petitioner for transfer of the said suit.”, the court observed. The court clarified that this point of lack of jurisdiction can be agitated before the Court in which the suit has been instituted. Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure empowers the Supreme Court if satisfied that an order 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.