The Plaintiff, Johnson & Johnson PTE Ltd. filed a case of trade mark infringement against the Defendants use of ORSI which is deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs mark ORSL. While the Plaintiff uses the mark in relation to electrolyte drinks, the Defendants were using it in relation to fruit drinks. The Defendants’ primary argument was that their business was primarily confined to Andhra Pradesh and that no cause of action arose in Delhi.

However, the Court held that online accessibility of the products through an interactive website established sufficient grounds for jurisdiction in Delhi. The Defendant’s website accepted orders and delivered products to Delhi, which constituted “use in the course of trade” under Section 2(2)(c) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Court stated that jurisdiction extends to any location where the product is accessible and available for sale, even if evidence of actual sales is not available.

Source: Johnson & Johnson PTE Ltd. v. Mr. Abbireddi Satish Kumar [CS(COMM) 801/2023].