The Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited (Zee) had filed a copyright infringement suit against Mohalla Tech Private Limited (MTPL), the owner of the short-video and social networking platforms ShareChat and Moj. The complaint alleged that despite the expiry of the licensing agreement between Zee and Mohalla Tech in mid-2023, ShareChat and Moj continued to make Zee’s copyrighted music and audiovisual content available to users, allowing them to create and share new short-form videos incorporating that content — effectively infringing Zee’s copyright. Zee claimed that once the licence expired in July–August 2023, the platforms no longer had authority to host or distribute its copyrighted repertoire. According to Zee, after the licence expired, its content should have been removed from the platforms’ libraries; but it discovered that over 1,300 works on ShareChat and more than 8,000 on Moj continued to remain accessible.
In response, Mohalla Tech filed an application asking that the plaint (the suit) be returned on the ground that the forum lacked territorial jurisdiction, invoking a contractual clause asserting “exclusive” jurisdiction in Mumbai courts. Mohalla Tech argued that since neither party had a registered office in Delhi, and the licensing agreement purportedly vested exclusive jurisdiction in Mumbai, the suit should not proceed in the capital’s High Court. It contended that mere online accessibility of ShareChat and Moj in Delhi was insufficient under Section 20(c) of the Civil Procedure Code to confer jurisdiction.
A Single-Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court, headed by Justice Mini Pushkarna, rejected Mohalla Tech’s application. The Court observed that Zee’s complaint was not rooted in a dispute arising from breach of the licensing agreement; rather, it stemmed from allegations of unauthorised availability and exploitation of Zee’s copyrighted works on the platforms after license expiry. Because the cause of action related to copyright infringement — an illegal exploitation independent of any contractual claim — and part of that cause of action arose within Delhi (due to the platforms’ accessibility and use by users in the territory), the Court held that it possessed territorial jurisdiction. Consequently, the plaint was held to be maintainable, and the court refused to return it.
The Court’s order underscores that when a suit concerns unauthorised use or infringement of copyrighted content, rather than merely contractual breach, the location where infringing acts occur — including online dissemination accessible in the forum region — may suffice to establish jurisdiction, even if the contract governing use contained a clause designating another forum. The ruling allows Zee’s copyright infringement case against Mohalla Tech, ShareChat, and Moj to proceed before the Delhi High Court.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.