A' a resident of Mumbai has a website 'www.caravan.co.in' launched in 2015. 'A' has a business of apparels in Mumbai having a trade mark 'CARAVAN'. The website is accessible from Delhi. 'B' a resident of Hyderabad starts a website 'www.caravaan.co.in' in 2017 having the same business. The website of 'B' consists of a catalogue, a toll free number, and an email address. 'A' wants to file a suit for passing off of trade mark in Delhi.
1. 'A' can file a suit in Delhi on the basis of accessibility of website of 'B'.
2. 'A' cannot file a suit merely on the accessibility of website.
3. 'A' cannot file a suit in Delhi as the website of 'B' is not interactive.
4. 'A' can file a suit if 'B' specifically targets the forum state resulting in harm to 'A' in forum State.
Choose the correct option from below:

A' a resident of Mumbai has a website 'www.caravan.co.in' launched in 2015. 'A' has a business of apparels in Mumbai having a trade mark 'CARAVAN'. The website is accessible from Delhi. 'B' a resident of Hyderabad starts a website 'www.caravaan.co.in' in 2017 having the same business. The website of 'B' consists of a catalogue, a toll free number, and an email address. 'A' wants to file a suit for passing off of trade mark in Delhi.
1. 'A' can file a suit in Delhi on the basis of accessibility of website of 'B'.
2. 'A' cannot file a suit merely on the accessibility of website.
3. 'A' cannot file a suit in Delhi as the website of 'B' is not interactive.
4. 'A' can file a suit if 'B' specifically targets the forum state resulting in harm to 'A' in forum State.
Choose the correct option from below: Correct Answer 2, 3 and 4 are correct

Related Questions

The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong' arguments and which is/are ‘weak' arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: The United States has launched what China calls the ‘largest trade war in economic history' and in its latest move targeted another $200 billion in Chinese export goods. The US-China spat is one of several trade fights picked by the protectionist President Donald Trump as his ‘America First' agenda disrupts trade relations among traditional allies. The growing share of international trade under threat has raised the prospect the escalating trade war could harm the global economy, shrinking investments and undermining supply chains. Why? Arguments: I. Several companies - including Total and Peugeot of France, and Russia's Lukoil - have said they are preparing to exit Iran ahead of US deadlines, the last of which is November 4. II. Trump argued the original deal from 2012 was lopsided in Seoul's favour but has also clouded the issue by appearing to link trade concessions to progress in his separate track of talks with nuclear-armed North Korea. III. Meanwhile, talks among the three NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) signatories, launched after Trump demanded an overhaul of the ‘terrible deal', have snagged notably owing to the US demands to increase American content installed in duty-free autos. 
In a contractual dispute between two parties A and B, A files a suit in New Delhi where the cause of action arose. Two days later, B files a suit in the same matter in Mumbai, where A is resident. The pendency of the first suit is not brought to the notice of the court in Mumbai. The court pronounces judgement in second suit before the first suit is decided. Would such decision operate as a bar on the court in New Delhi to try the suit any further?