Small trade mark suits to a District Judge, big ones to a Civil Judge: Supreme Court flags the inversion
A Division Bench holds Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act is not displaced by Commercial Courts notifications, identifies an anomaly in Jharkhand, and places the matter before the Chief Justice.
Two statutes tell a trade mark owner where to sue, and in some States they now point in opposite directions. On 21 September 2026, in I.S.D.S. Private Limited v. M/s Khemka Food Products Pvt. Ltd., a Division Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran set out why Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 survives notifications issued under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — and, recognising the wider consequences, placed the matter before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders while staying the suit below.
The question
Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act bars the institution of a suit for infringement and like reliefs before any court inferior to a District Court having jurisdiction to try the suit. The Commercial Courts Act permits High Courts to notify Commercial Courts at the district level, and several States — here Jharkhand — have notified the Civil Judge (Senior Division) as a Commercial Court.
The only question arising in the appeal was whether the restriction in Section 134 is rendered otiose by such a notification. The appellants argued that the very intention of Section 134 was to ensure that infringement suits are heard at a certain level of the judiciary, and that a notification under a later general statute should not quietly undo it.
Genus and species
The Bench’s view was that the two statutes can be read together. The Commercial Courts Act deals with the genus of commercial disputes as delineated in clauses (i) to (xxii) of Section 2(c). Arbitration is an alternative dispute resolution process governed by its own special legislation, and intellectual property rights including trade marks are only a species — clause 2(c)(xvii) — of that larger genus.
Section 3 empowers High Courts to notify the constitution of Commercial Courts at the district level, which includes the higher judiciary comprising the District Courts. Section 21 gives the Commercial Courts Act overriding effect only where there is something inconsistent in any other law for the time being in force. On that footing, where another special enactment such as the Trade Marks Act confers jurisdiction on the District Court by prohibiting the institution of suits for specified reliefs in any court inferior to that of a District Judge, it is not inconsistent with the Commercial Courts Act at all — and so there is nothing for Section 21 to override.
The anomaly the Court identified
The practical consequence in Jharkhand is where the judgment becomes striking. The specified value determining pecuniary jurisdiction under Section 3 is not less than three lakh rupees. In Jharkhand the Civil Judge (Senior Division) is notified as a Commercial Court with pecuniary jurisdiction between Rs 3 lakh and Rs 1 crore.
Put the two provisions together and the ladder inverts. A trade mark suit valued at less than Rs 3 lakh falls outside the Commercial Court’s pecuniary jurisdiction and must therefore be instituted before the District Court under Section 134 — while suits of higher value go to the Civil Judge (Senior Division). The smaller the claim, the more senior the forum.
The Bench noted that other States have run into the same difficulty and have resolved it administratively. In Kerala, the Civil Judge (Senior Division), termed the Subordinate Judge’s Court, was initially notified as the Commercial Court for suits valued above Rs 3 lakh; the threshold was later enhanced to Rs 10 lakh under Section 3(1A). Presumably recognising the anomaly arising from the two enactments, a subsequent notification designated all District Courts and Additional District Courts as Commercial Courts at the District Judge level for the purpose of exercising the jurisdiction and powers conferred.
The appellants’ submission went to purpose rather than text. The very intention of Section 134, they argued, was to ensure that infringement suits and like proceedings are tried at a defined level of the judiciary, and a notification issued under a general commercial statute should not be read as quietly removing that protection for a class of cases the special Act was written to govern.
Until the reference is answered, the safer course for a plaintiff in such a State is to institute before the District Court and meet any objection there.
Order
Given the implications for notifications across States, the Bench directed that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders. In the meantime, Commercial Suit No. 11 of 2023 pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division) – I, Jamshedpur, shall stand stayed.
Until the question is settled, the judgment leaves trade mark plaintiffs in States that have notified a Civil Judge (Senior Division) as a Commercial Court with a live jurisdictional risk — and gives defendants a ready objection to take at the threshold.