Court Dismisses Jurisdiction Challenge by Mohalla Tech
On December 8, 2025, a single‑judge bench of the Delhi High Court, led by Justice Mini Pushkarna, dismissed the application filed by Mohalla Tech seeking the return of the plaint on the grounds of lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Mohalla Tech had contended that the earlier licence and distribution agreements between the parties — which it claimed covered supply and hosting of audiovisual and music content — carried an “exclusive jurisdiction” clause favouring courts in Mumbai.
Court: Suit Is Not About Contract, But Statutory Copyright Infringement
The Court observed that the present lawsuit does not raise a dispute over breach of contract. Instead, it concerns alleged unauthorised use and distribution of ZEE’s copyrighted works on ShareChat and Moj, after the licences had expired.
Since the claim arises under statutory copyright law (and not contractual obligations), the earlier jurisdiction clauses do not apply. The Court held statutory rights cannot be overridden by private contractual arrangements — particularly when the alleged infringement is independent of the terminated agreements.
Digital Accessibility Is Sufficient for Jurisdiction in Delhi
The Court found that Mohalla Tech’s platforms are accessible and interactive nationwide, including in Delhi. Because the infringing content was allegedly available to users in Delhi, and the alleged exploitation occurred across the platforms, part of the cause of action arises within Delhi. This, the Court held, is adequate to confer territorial jurisdiction under Section 20(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
Background: Licence Expiry and Alleged Continued Infringements
ZEE had initially entered into agreements with Mohalla Tech starting November 1, 2022, under which Mohalla Tech was licensed to host and distribute ZEE’s long-form audiovisual content and music videos on ShareChat and Moj.
These agreements expired in July–August 2023. Thereafter, ZEE claimed it found over 1,300 instances of alleged copyright violation on ShareChat and more than 8,000 on Moj — content that ZEE says continued to be available via the platforms’ in‑built music libraries, without any valid licence.
Legal Significance: Strengthening Copyright Protection in the Digital Age
This judgment reaffirms that for digital platforms with nationwide reach, accessibility and interactivity — even without a physical office presence — can give rise to jurisdiction in courts across India.
It also underscores that statutory intellectual‑property rights (like copyright) maintain primacy over private contract clauses aiming to limit forum jurisdiction. Where infringement continues post‑licence expiry, the courts can examine cases irrespective of earlier exclusive jurisdiction agreements.
For creators, broadcasters, music labels, and other rights‑holders — especially in the arena of user‑generated content and streaming/short‑video platforms — the ruling sends a strong message: unauthorised use after licence expiry can attract litigation in any major jurisdiction where the infringing material is accessible.
