9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ht liberty to confine his arguments and reliefs only qua the challenge to the order dated 17.01.2025 passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Court)-02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi ["learned Trial Court"] in MISC DJ/3623/2024 whereby, the learned Revenue Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government of India was called upon to file an Action Taken Report ["ATR"] within a period of six weeks (paragraph nos. 34 and 35). Furthermore, Mr. Aditya Singla also sought to refrain from making any arguments qua challenge to the orders dated 05.09.2024, 20.09.2024, 27.09.2024, 19.10.2024 passed by the learned Trial Court in CS (COMM) 128/2023 [OLD No.-TM NO. 55/2018] ["CS(COMM) 130/2023"] and orders dated 24.10.2024 and 11.11.2024 also passed by the same learned Trial Court in MISC DJ/3623/2024 and sought liberty to challenge the same by way of appropriate proceedings before another forum in accordance with law. 3. Thereafter, on 13.05.2025, Mr. Aditya Singla sought some time for addressing arguments on the issue of maintainability and the matter was adjourned for today i.e. 15.05.2025. 4. The issue in the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has arisen ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 9605576 dated 08/05/2017. c) For a direction to Defendant No. 2 & 3 to absolute confiscate the impugned counterfeit goods bearing the Plaintiff's trademark/label under consignment under Bill of Entry No. 9605576 dated 08/05/2017 and liberty to the Plaintiff to destroy the said impugned goods in accordance with law. d) For an order for rendition of accounts of profits earned by the defendant no. 1 by its impugned illegal trade activities and a decree for the amount so found in favour of the plaintiff on such rendition of accounts. e) To direct the defendant no. 1 to disclose details of the exporter/supplier from where such impugned goods, have been supplied including the complete name, address, email id, contact number, bank details and other details relevant to the supplier of the Impugned goods. To direct the Defendant No. 1 to disclose the details of all the entities involved in the infringement chain of the impugned goods including the details of shipping line, clearing agent, freight forwarder, mode of payment, bank transactions PAN details etc. and any other agency involved. g) Restraining the defendant No. 1 from disposing of or dealing with his assets in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on was filed/ is pending against the said judgment and decree dated 19.10.2024 and no fresh proceedings by way of MISC DJ/3623/2024 could have been initiated by the learned Trial Court. In order to substantiate his aforesaid submissions, he relies upon the pronouncements by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Harshad Chiman Lal Modi v. DLF Universal Ltd. (2005) 7 SCC 791 as also Dr. Jagmittar Sain Bhagat v. Director, Health Services (2013) 10 SCC 136. 10. This Court has heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the documents on record as also the judgments cited at Bar. 11. The aforesaid reveals that, admittedly, the sole relief sought by the respondent before the learned Trial Court against the petitioners herein was only qua confiscation and non-release of the impugned counterfeit goods bearing the respondent's trademark/ label under consignment, i.e. bill of entry number 9605576 dated 08.05.2017. Also, admittedly, the learned Trial Court decreed CS (COMM) 128/2023 vide its judgment and decree dated 19.10.2024 in favour of the respondent. At the same time, vide a separate order passed by the same learned Trial Court on 19.10.2024, proceeded to pass t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d judgment of even date, announced in open court, the suit is decreed in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants with cost of the suit. Decree sheet be drawn up." as also ordered to consign the file pertaining to CS (COMM) 128/2023 instituted by the respondent to the record room. In effect, the learned Trial Court could not have given any direction for opening a new file i.e. MISC DJ/3623/2024 by suo moto assuming jurisdiction and take up the same and pass repeated directions therein on 24.10.2024, 11.11.2024 and 17.01.2025. 13. As per the settled position of law, a Court which does not statutorily, or otherwise, have jurisdiction to try and entertain a proceeding, cannot suo moto confer/ assume jurisdiction upon itself by any manner and/ or any reason whatsoever. What emerges therefrom is that the learned Trial Court had, even after passing of the judgment and decree dated 19.10.2024 suo moto conferred/ assumed jurisdiction of its own for the best reasons known to itself. 14. Reliance in this regard is placed upon Harshad Chiman (Supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been held as under:- "30. We are unable to uphold the contention. The jurisdiction of a court ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n itself to exercise a jurisdiction it does not possess, its decision amounts to nothing.' A decree passed by a court having no jurisdiction is non-est and its validity can be set up whenever it is sought to be enforced as a foundation for a right, even at the stage of execution or in collateral proceedings. A decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is a coram non judice. 33. In Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan, (1955) 1 SCR 117 : AIR 1954 SC 340, this Court declared; "It is a fundamental principle well established that a decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is a nullity and that its invalidity could be set up whenever and it is sought to be enforced or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and even in collateral proceedings. A defect of jurisdiction strikes at the very authority of the court to pass any decree, and such a defect cannot be cured even by consent of parties." (emphasis supplied) " [Emphasis supplied] 15. Reliance is also placed upon Dr. Jagmittar Sain Bhagat (Supra) wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:- "9. Indisputably, it is a settled legal proposition that conferment of jurisdiction is a legislative function and it can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Court is non-est. This Court reiterates that jurisdiction is conferred not assumed. The learned Trial Court erred in moving ahead with suo moto commencing with the proceedings in MISC DJ/3623/2024 without having jurisdiction to do so. As per the settled position of law, a Court which does not statutorily, or otherwise, have jurisdiction to try and entertain a proceeding cannot suo moto confer/ assume jurisdiction upon itself in any manner and/ or any reason whatsoever. 19. Admittedly, even though the petitioners have participated in MISC DJ/3623/2024 before the learned Trial Court and had given up their challenge to all the orders barring that of 17.01.2025 passed therein before this Court on 02.05.2025, the same would not and in fact cannot preclude this Court to take into account the cumulative facts that the learned Trial Court is acting without any jurisdiction to try and/ or entertain the proceedings not before it and accordingly proceed for adjudication of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India which empowers the High Courts to exercise "...superintendence over all Courts and Tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
