CS (OS) No.392/2005 Date of decision : August 21, 2009

The mere fact that a website is accessible in a particular place may not itself be sufficient for the courts of that place to exercise personal jurisdiction over the owners of the website. However, where the website is not merely passive but is interactive permitting the users not only to have access to the contents thereof but, also subscribe to the services provided by the owners/operators, may in certain circumstances create jurisdiction in the court of that place where the website is accessible. Where the website is interactive, the level of interactivity becomes relevant and in cases of limited interactivity such interactivity may not be sufficient for a court to exercise jurisdiction.In this case not even a small part of cause of action has arisen in Delhi. Hence, court hold that this court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present suit.