
The Supreme Court moved an interstate commercial lawsuit from the Delhi High Court to the Madras High Court, rebuking litigants who cross state lines to cherry-pick judicial venues.
Practice must stop. In an order dated October 28, a Bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan ruled that overlapping territorial jurisdictions do not grant corporations a roving commission to choose courts or construct an artificial hierarchy across India's High Courts.
Yet that is precisely what happened. Plaintiff M/s Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Agro Foods—operating out of Nelamangala in Karnataka’s Bengaluru Rural district—dragged defendant Sai Maghalakshmi Traders of Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 2,000 kilometers north to New Delhi. Both corporate entities operated out of adjacent southern states, and the Madras High Court retained concurrent original jurisdiction to hear the commercial suit from its inception.
The top court minced no words about the forum selection.
"We fail to understand as to why the respondents/plaintiffs have filed the suit before the Delhi High Court when both the parties are residing in the neighbouring states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and the Madras High Court also has original jurisdiction to entertain the suit," the Bench observed.
Litigants frequently gravitate to the national capital to litigate commercial and intellectual property actions under the belief that specific benches possess superior technical expertise. But the top court dismantled that premise entirely.
Any perception of a particular high court being better suited to hearing a particular type of dispute is entirely misguided and erroneous.
Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan, Supreme Court of India
Courts seated where the parties reside and where the business actually takes place remain best equipped to adjudicate disputes. The Bench underlined that when the parties, the corporate genesis, and the factual locus are concentrated in a specific territory, the local High Court holds the natural grasp of the dispute's practical nuances.
The ruling establishes that technical jurisdictional footholds cannot override the principle of natural geographic convenience.
| Case Parameter | Detail on Record |
|---|---|
| Petitioner / Defendant | Sai Maghalakshmi Traders (Chennai, Tamil Nadu) |
| Respondent / Plaintiff | M/s Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Agro Foods (Nelamangala, Bengaluru Rural, Karnataka) |
| Original Forum | Delhi High Court |
| Transferred Forum | Madras High Court |
| Ruling Bench | Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan |
| Order Date | October 28 |
Following the order, the Delhi High Court will transmit the suit papers directly to Chennai. The Madras High Court will now take up the commercial proceedings, with the top court permitting the respondents to appear before the bench either in person or via video conferencing.
| Permitted Appearance Mode |
| In-person or video conferencing |