Cross-Suits Under Trade Marks Act: Supreme Court Exercises Section 25 CPC Discretion To Consolidate & Transfer Parallel Infringement Suits To Neutral Forum

"The dispute between the parties centres on trademark infringement, etc. In effect, the commercial suits or cross-suits seek prayers restraining the Defendant from causing breach of trademark, etc. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective parties insisted that the other matter be transferred to the place where his/her client has instituted the Suit. The Counsel are at least in ad idem that both matters be tried before one Court." Exercising its jurisdiction and discretion under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Supreme Court bench of Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice N.V. Anjaria on October 28, 2026 transferred parallel commercial trademark suits pending before the High Court of Delhi and the District Judge (Commercial) at Indore to the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad, holding that cross-suits between identical parties over the same trademark ought to be consolidated and tried before a single neutral court.

The conflict arose from cross-suits filed by rival entities over intellectual property rights in the trademark 'SUPREME'. M/s Supremo India Private Limited initiated CS(COMM) No. 134 of 2025 before the District Judge (Commercial), Indore, seeking a permanent injunction, asset restraint, and damages of fifteen lakh rupees. Conversely, M/s The Supreme Industries Limited instituted CS(COMM) No. 1294 of 2025 before the Delhi High Court seeking restraint against trademark and copyright infringement, dilution, rendition of accounts, damages of over two crore rupees, and a declaration of 'SUPREME' as a well-known mark under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Both parties subsequently filed cross-transfer petitions before the Supreme Court seeking to consolidate the proceedings in their respective preferred courts.

Whether parallel commercial cross-suits between identical parties involving trademark infringement and passing off should be transferred and tried together before a single forum under Section 25 CPC to avoid conflicting decrees, and whether the Apex Court can transfer both suits to a neutral forum when parties consent to joint trial but dispute territorial venue?

The Supreme Court noted that the underlying dispute between the parties squarely centred on trademark infringement, passing off, and reciprocal restraining orders regarding the breach of proprietary marks. The bench recorded that both commercial suits effectively raised interrelated prayers seeking to enjoin the opposing defendant from utilizing or infringing upon the trademark in question across physical and virtual marketplaces.

Parties ad idem on joint trial but divided on forum territoriality

The Court observed that senior counsel representing both contesting sides ardently pressed for the transfer of the adversary's suit to the venue where their respective client had originally instituted proceedings. However, the bench underscored that both sides were unequivocally united on the procedural necessity that both cross-suits must be clubbed and adjudicated together by a single judicial authority.

Supreme Court chooses neutral commercial forum in exercise of Section 25 CPC powers

Taking note of the consensus regarding joint trial, the Court observed that though the parties suggested a few alternative locations, they mutually resisted submitting to the territorial jurisdiction chosen by the opposing party. The bench emphasized that the counsel eventually permitted the Court to exercise its statutory discretion to transfer both suits to an appropriate forum.

Merits kept open while consolidating plaints before Ahmedabad City Civil Court

Declining to express any opinion on the underlying factual rivalries or the merits of the trademark infringement claims, the Apex Court determined that the ends of justice would be met by transferring both suits away from Delhi and Indore to a neutral commercial court. The bench directed that both commercial suits be transferred to the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad for joint adjudication.

Disposing of both transfer petitions, the Supreme Court directed the High Court of Delhi and the District Judge (Commercial), Indore to transmit the respective plaints and trial records expeditiously to the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, and directed both parties to appear before the transferee court on November 26, 2026.

Date of Decision: October 28, 2026

Case Title: M/s The Supreme Industries Limited v. M/s Supremo India Private Limited (with connected matter) | Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 3594 of 2025 (with Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 175 of 2026)

Bench: Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice N.V. Anjaria

Counsel: Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul and Senior Advocate S. Janani for the respective parties