Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

january 2010

Supreme Court of India · 2010-01-29

M/S Godrej Sara Lee Limited vs Reckitt Benckiser Australia Pty.Ld.& ...

Citation / case number
AIR 2010 SUPREME COURT 1331
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
M/S Godrej Sara Lee Limited
Respondent
Reckitt Benckiser Australia Pty.Ld.& ...
Author
Altamas Kabir
Bench
Cyriac Joseph, Altamas Kabir

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court addressed the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court in appeals against the Controller of Patents and Designs' orders under Section 19(1) of the Designs Act, 2000. The Court held that the expression 'High Court' in Section 19(2) must be interpreted in relation to the cause of action, which arose from the cancellation of designs in Kolkata, thus affirming that only the Calcutta High Court has jurisdiction. Consequently, the appeals filed in the Delhi High Court were deemed maintainable, leading to the dismissal of the appeals by M/s. Godrej Sara Lee Ltd.

M/S Godrej Sara Lee Limited vs Reckitt Benckiser Australia Pty.Ld.& ... · Niyam