The Supreme Court has transferred two competing commercial suits concerning trademark infringement from the Delhi High Court and the Commercial Court at Indore to the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, after both parties agreed that the disputes should be tried before one court but opposed each other’s preferred venue.

A Bench of Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice N.V. Anjaria delivered the judgment on October 28, 2026, in cross-transfer petitions involving M/s The Supreme Industries Limited and M/s Supremo India Private Limited.

Buy Now: 90+ Supreme Court Judgments – September 2026

The Court directed the courts concerned to transfer the respective plaints expeditiously and instructed the parties to appear before the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, on November 26, 2026.

The proceedings arose from two commercial suits instituted by the companies against each other.

Supremo India Private Limited had filed CS (Comm) No. 134 of 2025 before the District Judge (Commercial), Indore. Supreme Industries Limited, the defendant in that suit, approached the Supreme Court seeking transfer of the proceedings to a competent court in New Delhi.

Supreme Industries Limited had separately instituted CS (Comm) No. 1294 of 2025 before the Delhi High Court. Supremo India Private Limited sought transfer of that suit to the Commercial Court at Indore or another competent court in Indore.

Each company thus wanted the suit filed against it moved to the city where its own proceedings were pending.

According to the Supreme Court’s summary of the pleadings, the suit instituted by Supremo India Private Limited at Indore sought permanent injunctive relief concerning the defendants’ manufacturing, advertising, promotional and other activities in the trademark dispute.

The company also sought an order restraining the defendants from disposing of or dealing with their assets, together with a direction requiring disclosure of those assets.

Its prayers further included orders for the impugned goods to be restrained, disabled and removed from third-party interactive e-commerce platforms.

The suit sought ₹15 lakh in damages. These were reliefs requested in the plaint; the Supreme Court did not grant them in the transfer proceedings.

The suit filed by Supreme Industries Limited before the Delhi High Court sought permanent injunctions against alleged infringement of its registered trademark and passing off.

The prayers covered manufacturing, selling, exporting, importing, offering for sale, distributing and advertising goods bearing an allegedly similar or identical mark in physical and virtual marketplaces.

The company also sought protection against alleged dilution and tarnishment of its trademark, rendition of accounts of profits, and delivery and destruction of allegedly infringing products.

Its damages claim amounted to ₹2,00,01,000, sought jointly and severally against the defendants.

The reliefs summarised in the judgment additionally included a request for recognition of the mark as a well-known trademark under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

The Supreme Court did not adjudicate these claims or award the compensation sought.

The Bench recorded that the dispute centred on trademark infringement and that the commercial actions were effectively cross-suits seeking restraint against alleged breaches of trademark rights.

Senior counsel Neeraj Kishan Kaul and S. Janani appeared for the parties.

Each side insisted that the other proceeding should be transferred to the place where its own client had instituted the suit. Although alternative locations were suggested, the parties opposed the venue chosen by the contesting company.

However, both sides agreed that the matters should be tried before one court and left the selection of that court to the Supreme Court.

Exercising its jurisdiction and discretion, the Supreme Court transferred both suits to the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad.

The direction places the competing trademark actions before one court without accepting either party’s original request to move the opposing suit to its preferred city.

The courts where the suits were instituted must transfer the respective plaints expeditiously. The parties must appear before the Ahmedabad court on November 26, 2026.

The Bench disposed of both transfer petitions and any pending applications accordingly.

The Supreme Court expressly refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits of the dispute. It also declined to set out some of the arguments advanced during the hearing.

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.

Read More: No Automatic Bail For Arrest-Grounds Service Defect Without Prejudice: Supreme Court