https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161340 Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 enlarges the ordinary territorial rule by providing an additional forum where any plaintiff actually and voluntarily resides, carries on business, or personally works for gain. Territorial jurisdiction must be assessed on the plaint averments, not on disputed defence facts. On the plaint, the defendant carried on business in Delhi, had an office in New Delhi, and received the cease-and-desist notice there, which could supply a jurisdictional nexus in a copyright dispute. The Division Bench therefore erred in directing return of the plaint, and the Delhi High Court's jurisdiction was upheld. en-us Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Apr 2020 13:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161340 Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 enlarges the ordinary territorial rule by providing an additional forum where any plaintiff actually and voluntarily resides, carries on business, or personally works for gain. Territorial jurisdiction must be assessed on the plaint averments, not on disputed defence facts. On the plaint, the defendant carried on business in Delhi, had an office in New Delhi, and received the cease-and-desist notice there, which could supply a jurisdictional nexus in a copyright dispute. The Division Bench therefore erred in directing return of the plaint, and the Delhi High Court's jurisdiction was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161340