P B Agro LLP vs. Union of India and Ors.
Background
The petitioner, the maker of "VIMAL" branded cardamom/pan masala products, challenged a show-cause notice issued by Mumbai's Food and Drug Administration to its Mumbai-based celebrity brand ambassadors over an allegedly misleading advertisement, even though no notice had been issued to the petitioner itself. The petitioner argued Delhi courts had jurisdiction since it is based in Delhi and the apex food-safety and consumer-protection authorities are located in Delhi.
Decision Breakdown
The Court held it lacked territorial jurisdiction because the notice was issued by a Maharashtra state authority, addressed to Mumbai residents, concerning an alleged violation located in Maharashtra: the mere fact that the petitioner's business and some national regulatory bodies happen to sit in Delhi does not create jurisdiction here. Even if a slender jurisdictional link existed, the Court would still decline the case under the "forum conveniens" doctrine since Maharashtra courts are the natural and more appropriate forum.
Lesson Learnt
A company cannot choose to litigate in Delhi simply because it is headquartered there or because a national regulator's office is located there: jurisdiction follows where the disputed action, the affected parties, and the underlying facts are actually situated.