IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, MATHURA

T.S.NO:- …… of……

IN THE MATTER OF:-

P ….. PLAINTIFF

Versus

D …DEFENDANT

APPLICATION ON THE BEHALF OF DEFENDANT UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11

READ WITH SECTION 151 OF C.P.C FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT

THE DEFENDANT MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS AS UNDER:-

PRELIMINARY OBJECTIVES:

1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit against the defendant for patent infringement,
mandatory injunction and other relief. It is stated that the plaint is liable to be rejected in
accordance with provision of ORDER VII RULE 11 of CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE, 1908 as the plaint fails to specify the valuation of suit.
 2. That in the present patent infringement suit, petitioner claimed to have invested 3 cores in
research and development and demanded the damages amounting to 1 lakh , this shows
than plaintiff has not only failed to provide the specified value to the suit but has
also arbitrarily valued the suit. Sec 2(1)(c) of Commercial Court Act 2015 states that
Specified Value, in relation to a commercial dispute, shall mean the value of the subject-
matter in respect of a suit as determined in accordance with section 12 [which shall not be
less than three lakh rupees] or such higher value, as may be notified by the Central
Government.

The Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in Lajwanti Devi V. Kiran Chand Lasdoa
where in para no 1 of order dated 29.09.05 said , the application under Order VII Rule 11
filed on the ground of undervaluation of suit is cogent ground for the rejection of plaint.

In Vishal Pipes Limited v. Bhavya Pipe Industry, held that all the IPR disputes,
irrespective of their valuations, should be listed before the commercial district court judges.
If the subject-matter IP is valued below 3 lakhs rupees, the Court will examine whether the
valuation is correct or not. If the valuation is found to be below 3 lakhs rupees, the suit will
be treated as a normal civil suit by the district commercial court. If the valuation is found to
be above or equal to 3 lakhs rupees, the suit will be treated as a commercial suit as per
Commercial Courts Act.

3. That the patent infringement suit presented before Hon’ble Mathura court lacks jurisdiction
thus is liable to be returned on that ground, as the matter of of patent infringement is a matter
which falls under the jurisdiction of commercial court.

4. That the patent infringement suit presented by petitioner is under the ambit of Section 2 of
Commercial Court Act 2015, which defines ‘Commercial dispute’ and ‘commercial court’ thus
being a commercial dispute, suit is under the jurisdiction of commercial court. Upon
reading the section 15 (Transfer of pending cases) and section 21( Act to have overriding effect)
of the Commercial Court , it is evident that commercial court act will have an overriding effect
and prior jurisdiction over the civil court thus the plaint is liable to be returned on that ground.

The Supreme Court (“SC”) in it s judgment dated October 19, 2022, in t he case
of Jaycee Housing Private Limited And Others v. Registrar (General), Orissa
High Court, Cuttack And Others [Civil Appeal No. 6876 of 2022], held that the
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (“CCA”) has an overriding effect and shall prevail
over the Arbitrat ion & Conciliat ion Act, 1996 (“Arbitrat ion Act ”).

Prayer:-

5. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the defendant humbly prays that this
Hon’ble court:-

a) Reject the plaint

b) Order costs in favor of defendant

c) Pass any other order this Hon’ble court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the present
case.

It is prayed accordingly

(Defendant)

Through (Advocate)

Date