Trade Marks Act 1999 Section 134: Suit for Infringement and Jurisdiction (2026)
What Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 does: it says which court can hear a trade mark infringement suit, and gives the owner an extra option to sue where it lives or works, not only where the infringer is. Last verified October 2026.
Explainer · Trade Marks Law
Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 answers a simple but important question: which court can hear a suit for infringing a registered trade mark? It also gives the owner a helpful extra choice of where to sue. In short, Section 134 says such a suit must be filed in a District Court or a High Court with ordinary original civil jurisdiction, and, unlike the normal civil rule, the owner can sue in the court where it lives, carries on business or works for gain, not only where the infringer is. This explainer sets out what the section says, the extra forum, the limits the Supreme Court has placed on it, and the practical effect. Last verified October 2026.
- What it is: Section 134 sets the court and the jurisdiction for a suit to enforce a registered trade mark.
- Which court: not below a District Court, or a High Court with ordinary original civil jurisdiction where one exists.
- Extra forum: Section 134(2) lets the owner also sue where it resides, carries on business or works for gain.
- The limit: in IPRS v. Sanjay Dalia the Supreme Court held the owner must sue where its main office and the infringement coincide, and cannot pick a distant branch office.
- Passing off: a suit for an unregistered mark follows the ordinary civil rules, not Section 134(2).
01What Section 134 says
Section 134 does two things. First, it fixes the level of court that can hear a trade mark suit. Second, it changes the usual rule about where you can sue, in favour of the trade mark owner.
Infringement needs a registered mark
Section 134 is about suits for infringing a registered trade mark and related statutory rights. If a mark is not registered, the owner sues for passing off, and that suit follows the ordinary jurisdiction rules of the Civil Procedure Code, not the special forum in Section 134(2).
This split matters. The right to sue where you live is one of the biggest practical advantages of registering a trade mark, because it can save the owner from chasing an infringer across the country.
02Which court can hear the suit
Section 134(1) says a suit for infringement of a registered trade mark, or for passing off arising out of its use, or for related statutory rights, cannot be filed in a court lower than a District Court having jurisdiction to try the suit. Where a High Court has ordinary original civil jurisdiction, such as the Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta and Madras High Courts for suits above a value threshold, the suit can be filed there.
So the floor is a District Court. A junior civil court cannot try a trade mark infringement suit. This keeps these cases, which often need careful handling, before courts of adequate standing.
03The extra forum for the owner
The heart of Section 134 is sub-section (2). Normally, under the Civil Procedure Code, you sue where the defendant lives or where the cause of action arose. Section 134(2) adds another option for the trade mark owner.
Under Section 134(2), the suit can also be filed in the District Court within whose limits the person suing actually and voluntarily resides, carries on business, or personally works for gain. The word person here includes the registered proprietor and the registered user.
Why this helps the owner
Without this rule, an owner in Delhi would often have to sue an infringer in a distant town where the infringer sits. Section 134(2) lets the owner file at home instead. It is a deliberate tilt in favour of the rights holder, mirrored by Section 62 of the Copyright Act.
04The IPRS v. Sanjay Dalia limit
The extra forum is not unlimited. In Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia, the Supreme Court read Section 134(2) of the Trade Marks Act and Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act together and placed a sensible limit on them.
The Court held that where the plaintiff has its principal office at the place where the cause of action also arose, it must sue there, and cannot drag the defendant to a different branch office location. In other words, the owner cannot use a minor branch office in a far-off city to pick a convenient forum when its main office and the infringement are both in the same place. The provision helps a plaintiff sue at home, but it is not a tool to harass defendants with inconvenient forums.
05How courts apply it
After Dalia, High Courts look closely at where the plaintiff really carries on business. A plaintiff must show that it actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business at the chosen place, not merely that goods reached there. Courts have rejected suits where the plaintiff's principal place of business, shown by records such as its GST registration, was elsewhere.
Courts have also held that the place where goods were bought, not where a single customer happens to live, governs jurisdiction under the cause-of-action limb. The theme is that the forum must have a genuine connection to the plaintiff or to the infringement.
06A practical note
Choosing the right court is a strategic decision, not a formality. Filing in the wrong forum can get the suit returned or dismissed, wasting months. Before filing, be clear about where the plaintiff truly carries on business, where the infringement is happening, and whether a High Court with original jurisdiction is open to you.
For how infringement itself is proved, see Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act. For keeping an eye on copycats and disputes as they arise, see tracking trade mark infringement cases in Indian courts.
07Where Claw fits
Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals.
Jurisdiction fights under Section 134(2) turn on how courts have applied Dalia and the genuine-connection test. Claw lets you search more than 30 crore judgments and orders, with Supreme Court rulings from 1950 and High Court rulings from 1990, to see how courts have decided where a trade mark suit can be filed, with results in under 5 seconds. You can also track a live infringement suit by party or advocate name across 9,102 courts, benches and forums, so you can follow a matter wherever it is filed. Claw does not use the documents you upload to train its AI models.
Create a free Claw account to research Section 134 jurisdiction rulings and follow a pending trade mark suit, and use case search across Indian courts to find decisions on forum and jurisdiction.
08Sources and further reading
- India Code (official text of the Trade Marks Act, 1999): indiacode.nic.in
- Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks: ipindia.gov.in
- Indian Kanoon (judgments on Section 134 and IPRS v. Sanjay Dalia): indiankanoon.org
- Claw: clawlaw.in
This explainer is general information, not legal advice. Jurisdiction turns on the facts, so check the current text and take advice from counsel before you file.
09Frequently asked questions
Which court can hear a trade mark infringement suit?
Under Section 134(1), a suit to enforce a registered trade mark cannot be filed below a District Court with jurisdiction. Where a High Court has ordinary original civil jurisdiction, such as Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta or Madras for suits above the value threshold, the suit can be filed there.
Can a trade mark owner sue where it lives?
Yes. Section 134(2) lets the owner file the suit in the District Court where it actually and voluntarily resides, carries on business or personally works for gain. This is an extra option on top of the ordinary rule of suing where the defendant is or where the cause of action arose.
What did IPRS v. Sanjay Dalia decide?
The Supreme Court held that where the plaintiff's principal office is at the same place where the cause of action arose, it must sue there, and cannot use a distant branch office to choose a convenient forum. The extra forum helps the owner sue at home but cannot be used to harass defendants.
Does Section 134(2) apply to passing off of an unregistered mark?
No. Section 134(2) is tied to suits for infringement of a registered trade mark and related statutory rights. A pure passing-off suit for an unregistered mark follows the ordinary jurisdiction rules of the Civil Procedure Code.
Is sale of goods in a city enough to give that court jurisdiction?
Not by itself. Courts have held that the place where goods were bought, not where a single customer lives, matters for the cause-of-action limb, and that the plaintiff must genuinely carry on business at a place to rely on the Section 134(2) forum.
Can Claw help with trade mark jurisdiction research?
Yes. Claw lets you search more than 30 crore judgments and orders, including how Section 134 and IPRS v. Sanjay Dalia have been applied, with Supreme Court rulings from 1950 and High Court rulings from 1990, and track a pending trade mark suit across 9,102 courts, benches and forums, with results in under 5 seconds. It researches and tracks the matter but does not give legal advice.