Zukerberg’s Meta can’t move Blink Digital’s Rs 1,000 crore suit to US, Bombay HC rejects plea

The HC order came on an interim application by Meta. (File Photo)

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday dismissed an application by Meta Platforms Inc. to move a Rs 1,000-crore lawsuit filed by city-based digital advertising agency Blink Digital (India) Private Limited to California, United States.

A single-judge bench of Justice Sandeep V Marne held that Indian courts have jurisdiction to entertain the dispute governed by local laws and rejected Meta’s claim that California courts must decide the commercial dispute exclusively under California law.

The HC order came on an interim application by Meta, argued by senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas, questioning the High Court’s jurisdiction over Blink Digital’s suit seeking account restoration and Rs 1,000 crore in damages. It sought return of Blink Digital’s Plaint under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) to the appropriate court.

Blink Digital filed the suit after Meta disabled four of its business manager accounts on August 4, 2026, shutting down around 9,000 advertising accounts, client pages, and corporate profiles for alleged policy violations.

Advocate Kunal Dwarkadas for the agency argued the disablement was “arbitrary,” lacked a prior hearing, and violated the Information Technology Act and the 2021 Intermediary Guidelines.

Justice Marne noted, “A private contract entered into between the parties regarding the exclusive jurisdiction of courts and the applicability of a foreign law cannot override statutory provisions of laws in India.”

The judge emphasized that “parties cannot contract out of non-derogable statutes, public policy, or mandatory local laws.”

Story continues below this ad

Justice Marne said that while “Meta may be a global player,” Indian laws imposed certain obligations on it as a “significant social media intermediary” located within India and bound by the IT Act and intermediary rules.

The judge went on to note, “The provisions of the IT Act and the Intermediary Rules are intended to prevent a situation in which a significant social media intermediary profits from its operations in India while seeking to evade its obligations under the Indian laws.”

Therefore, he held, California courts cannot decide on the violations of the provisions of the Indian laws.

The bench noted that another defendant, Facebook India Online Services Private Limited, which is an Indian subsidiary of Meta, did not raise an objection to the HC’s jurisdiction.

Story continues below this ad

“I am of the view that Defendant No. 2-Meta has failed to demonstrate that this Court totally lacks territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present suit,” Justice Marne held. The HC will hear Blink Digital’s plea for interim relief on November 2.