ASTRAL LTD. vs M/S ASTRAL MARKETING SYNDICATE & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: 08.05.2026 % Judgment delivered on: 15.06.2026 + CS(COMM) 294/2024 ASTRAL LTD. .....Plaintiff versus M/S ASTRAL MARKETING SYNDICATE & ANR. .....Defendants Advocates who appeared in this case For the Plaintiff : Mr. Sachin Gupta, Ms. Mahima Chanchalani, Ms. Prashansa Singh, Mr. Rohit Pradhan, Mr. R. Jain & Mr. Ajay, Advocates. For the Defendants : Mr. Anchit Bhandari & Mr. Ashok Mittal, Advocates for Defendant No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA JUDGMENT TEJAS KARIA, J I.A. 16193/2025 1. The present Application has been filed by Defendant No. 1 / Applicant under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of CS(COMM) 294/2024 Page 1 of 15 Signature Not Verified Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:15.06.2026 19:14:30 Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) seeking rejection of the Plaint filed by the Plaintiff. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT / DEFENDANT NO. 1: 2. The learned Counsel for the Applicant / Defendant No. 1 advanced the following submissions: 2.1. The Plaint is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC on the grounds that this Court lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present Suit. 2.2. Under Section 20 of the CPC, a Suit may be instituted only where the defendants reside, carry on business, or where the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises. In the present case, Defendant No. 1 carries on business exclusively at Ahmedabad, as is acknowledged by the Plaintiff in the Memorandum of Parties to the Plaint as well as in the supporting documents placed on record. Further, the Plaintiff’s principal place of business is also situated in Ahmedabad. Accordingly, this Court dees not have the territorial jurisdiction to try the present Suit. 2.3. The Plaintiff ha