Synopsis

The plaintiffs filed a suit for patent infringement before the Delhi High Court. The defendant, based in Thane, Maharashtra, filed an application under Order VII Rules 10 and 11 CPC seeking rejection/return of the plaint on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. The defendant also filed a separate revocation petition before the same court under Section 64 of the Patents Act. The plaintiffs sought amendment of the plaint to add further jurisdictional facts. The Delhi High Court dismissed the defendant’s application, holding that: (i) the plaint as originally filed disclosed a partial cause of action within Delhi because the Ayodhya Airport tender was issued by the Airports Authority of India (AAI) having its registered office in Delhi; (ii) the revocation petition filed by the defendant before the same court, coupled with Section 104 of the Patents Act and the principle in Aloys Wobben, supported jurisdiction; (iii) quia timet principles apply where there is an imminent threat of infringement; and (iv) the proposed amendments were clarificatory and allowed. The amendment application was allowed and the suit was to proceed.

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Coram: Justice Tejas Karia

Date of Judgment: 10th April 2026

Citation: CS(COMM) 456/2023 (2026:DHC:2992)

Core Law: Patents Act, 1970 – Sections 48, 64, 104, 109; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order VII Rules 10, 11; Order VI Rule 17; Section 20

2. Legal Framework

Major laws and provisions involved

• Patents Act, 1970 – Sections 48 (rights of patentee), 64 (revocation of patents), 104 (jurisdiction of High Court in infringement suits), 109 (suits concerning patents)

• Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order VII Rules 10 (return of plaint) and 11 (rejection of plaint), Order VI Rule 17 (amendment of pleadings), Section 20 (suits where cause of action arises)

Key legal principles applied

• Territorial jurisdiction in patent infringement suits: Under Section 104 of the Patents Act and Section 20 CPC, a suit can be filed where the cause of action wholly or partly arises. The location of the tendering authority (AAI in Delhi) for a project (Ayodhya Airport) where alleged infringement occurred gives rise to partial cause of action in Delhi.

• Revocation petition and infringement suit – same court: Where a revocation petition under Section 64 has been filed before a court, it is appropriate that the infringement suit also be heard by the same court. The proviso to Section 104 and the decision in Aloys Wobben&

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.