SC Transfers 'SUPREME' Trademark Cross-Suits to Ahmedabad

Supreme Court Sends 'SUPREME' Trademark Cross-Suits From Indore and Delhi to One Court in Ahmedabad

Published: 29 October 2026 · NyayVidhan

The Supreme Court has transferred two commercial suits over the 'SUPREME' trademark between M/s The Supreme Industries Limited and M/s Supremo India Private Limited, pending at Indore and in the Delhi High Court, to the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad. Each company wanted the other's suit moved to its own forum; both agreed that one court should try the two suits and left the choice to the Bench, which expressed no view on the merits (paras 2, 4, 6).

Key holdings

Cross-suits over the 'SUPREME' trademark at Indore and in the Delhi High Court were both transferred to the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad (para 6).

Neither company's own forum was chosen, though each had sought transfer of the other's suit to it (paras 2, 4, 6).

Both sides agreed to a single court and left the choice to the Bench, which expressed no view on the merits (para 6).

The plaints are to be sent to Ahmedabad expeditiously, and the parties are to appear there on 26.11.2026 (para 6).

Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.

Brief Facts

Supremo India sued Supreme Industries before the District Judge (Commercial), Indore (CS (Comm) No. 134 of 2025), seeking an injunction over the impugned trademark 'SUPREME', orders on assets and e-commerce listings, and Rs. 15 lakh in damages (para 3). Supreme Industries sued Supremo India and another in the Delhi High Court (CS (Comm) No. 1294 of 2025), seeking injunctions against infringement, passing off, copyright infringement and dilution, damages of Rs. 2,00,01,000 and a declaration of 'SUPREME' as a well-known mark (paras 4-5). Each sought transfer of the other's suit, to New Delhi and to Indore respectively (paras 2, 4).

Court's Findings

The Court heard the two petitions together, as they are between the same parties (para 1). It found that the dispute centres on trademark infringement, with the cross-suits each seeking to restrain the defendant from causing breach of trademark (para 6). It recorded that each side opposed the other's chosen place, but that both were ad idem that the suits be tried before one court and had left it to the Court to transfer both to one particular court (para 6). Without referring to some of the contentions or expressing a view on the merits, and in the exercise of the jurisdiction and discretion vested in it, the Court transferred both suits to the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad (para 6). Neither petition's prayer named Ahmedabad (paras 2, 4). The judgment notes that a few alternative places were suggested but does not name them, gives no further reason for the choice, and cites no decision or statutory provision.

Legal Principle

Where cross-suits between the same parties over the same trademark are pending in different courts and both sides agree that one court should try them, the Supreme Court may, in its discretion and without a view on the merits, transfer both to a court other than either party's chosen forum (para 6).

NyayVidhan's view · Practice note

Why It Matters

For businesses litigating over a mark in two cities, this judgment shows a practical risk of a transfer petition. When each side wants the other's suit moved to its own forum but both accept that one court should try the two suits, the Supreme Court may send both to a court that neither side chose in its petition. Here both suits went to Ahmedabad on the Court's discretion, with no view on the merits (para 6). Parties should come with alternative fora and reasons for them, and should note the appearance date of 26.11.2026 as the plaints move from Indore and Delhi (para 6).

Editorial comment by the NyayVidhan Editorial Desk. It is not part of the Court's judgment and is not legal advice.