Assam Court Returns Suit By Bisleri's Ex-Franchisee Against Termination Of Contract As Parties Had Agreed To Mumbai Court's Jurisdiction

An Assam court granted relief to Bisleri International Private Limited in its application under Order 7 Rule 10 CPC for return of plaint in a lawsuit by an ex-franchisee of Bisleri, on the ground that both the parties had agreed that a Court in Mumbai would have exclusive jurisdiction to try any action/litigation arising out of the Franchise Agreement.The Court of Civil Judge Priyanka Khataniar noted that normally the Court would have jurisdiction where the cause of action wholly or part arises as provided by Section 20(c) of CPC. Noting that Clause X of the Franchise Agreement was "unambiguous and explicit" the court said,"By making a provision in the Franchisee agreement that the Court in Mumbai would have exclusive jurisdiction to try any action or litigation arising out of the Franchisee agreement, the parties have impliedly excluded the jurisdiction of other courts". “Thus the petitioner by signing and agreeing to the terms of the Franchise Agreement has waived its right to institute any action arising out of the Franchise Agreement at any place except at Mumbai,” the Court said.Observing that the parties had agreed to vest the jurisdiction with the court located in the "territorial lines of Mumbai", the court said that it had no jurisdiction to try the instant suit.The plaintiff–G D Food and Beverages was franchisee of the petitioner/defendant (Bisleri) since 2012 and the parties had renewed the agreements from time to time. The defendant had appointed the plaintiff as a franchisee vide Franchise Agreement (FA) for certain territories in Assam, and as per the terms of the FA, the plaintiff was required to use the containers, cartons, labels, bottles etc. in compliance with the specifications laid down by the defendant, manufacture packaged drinking water bearing the said trademark as per approved process, conditions as recommended by the defendant and further that the use of the said trademark by the plaintiff was under the strict supervision of the defendant.It was contended by Bisleri that the plaintiff had failed to make royalty payment since August 2024 and also failed to pay the TDS as required under law from April 2024 to October 2024 thereby breaching the terms of the FA. Therefore, Bisleri had terminated the Franchisee Agreement with effect from November 7, 2024.The plaintiff filed the suit before the Assam Court for declaration and permanent injunction against termination of franchise agreement and the plaintiff obtained ex-parte injunction order dated November 28, 2024 against the termination of the agreement. It was submitted by Bisleri that the alleged dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant arose out of Franchisee Agreement and that as per the said agreement both the parties had expressly conferred exclusive jurisdiction to the Court in Mumbai in the event of any dispute.The Court thus ordered for return of plaint and to be filed before the Court having competent jurisdiction. The Court further vacated the ad interim order.Case title: GD Food Beverages v/s Bisleri International Private LimitedAdvocate Priyangshu Goswami appeared for Bisleri, briefed by Ms. Smriti Yadav, Partner and Mr. Dhiren Karania, Principal Associate with Khaitan & Co. with support from Advocate Rana Singha. Case No.: T.S. No. 322/2024

Assam Court Returns Suit By Bisleri's Ex-Franchisee Against Termination Of Contract As Parties Had Agreed To Mumbai Court's Jurisdiction

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Assam Court Returns Suit By Bisleri's Ex-Franchisee Against Termination Of Contract As Parties Had Agreed To Mumbai Court's Jurisdiction

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers