Bench: Justice B.P. Singh & Justice S.B. Sinha
Issue:
What is the scope of the word ‘carries on business' to file a suit as per CPC,1908?
Facts:
- The appellant filed a suit against the respondent for protecting his trademarks and copyrights which has been infringed by the respondent. The suit was against the use of the mark ‘Dhodha House'.
- The District Judge, Ghaziabad passed an order of injunction against the respondent.
- The respondent filed an appeal in HC. The HC held that the civil court had no territorial jurisdiction to try the suit.
- Then, appellant filed appeal in SC.
Petitioner's contentions:
• It was contended that the civil court indeed has a territorial jurisdiction in the present case as the application for registration of the trademark has appeared in the Trade Marks Journal.
Respondent's contentions :
• The contention raised was that the respondent neither resided in Ghaziabad nor carried on the business at the place of residence of the appellant. So, the decision of HC is correct.
Judgement:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision of the High Court that the civil court didn't have the territorial jurisdiction to try the said suit.
“The expression “carries on business” and the expression “personally works for gain” connote two different meanings. For the purpose of carrying on business only presence of a man at a place is not necessary. Such business may be carried on at a place through an agent or a manager or through a servant. The owner may not even visit that place. The phrase “carries on business” at a certain place would, therefore, mean having an interest in a business at that place, a voice in what is done, a share in the gain or loss and some control thereover. The expression is much wider than what the expression in normal parlance connotes, because of the ambit of a civil action within the meaning of Section 9 of the Code.”
A corporation in view of Explanation appended to Section 20 of the Code would be deemed to be carrying on business inter alia at a place where it has a subordinate office. Only because its goods are being sold at a place would thus evidently not mean that it carries on a business at that place.
- Para 46,47 (M/S. Dhodha House v. S.K. Maingi)
