India

Bombay HC Rejects Meta's Plea to Move Blink Digital's ₹1,158 Crore Suit to California

Justice Sandeep V Marne dismissed Meta's objection that only California courts could hear the agency's case, clearing the way for a 2 November hearing on restoring four disabled ad accounts.

Why it mattersThe ruling suggests Indian agencies and advertisers can take disputes with Meta over disabled ad accounts to Indian courts, despite the platform's choice-of-forum terms.

The Gothic Revival facade of the Bombay High Court building in Mumbai
Photo: Gnoeee / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)

The Bombay High Court on 27 October 2026 dismissed Meta's application to have digital agency Blink Digital's ₹1,158 crore damages suit sent out of India, rejecting the argument that only courts in California could hear the dispute, according to reports by BestMediaInfo, Social Samosa and Adgully.

Justice Sandeep V Marne's order means the case will continue in Mumbai. The court has not ruled on whether Meta was right to disable Blink's accounts, or on the damages claim.

What Meta argued

Meta had moved the court under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which lets a court return a plaint it has no jurisdiction to hear. Citing its contract terms, the company argued that the dispute belonged in California. The court had reserved its order on 16 October, BestMediaInfo reported.

The defendants are Facebook India Online Services Pvt Ltd and Meta Platforms Inc. On 10 September, the court allowed Blink to pursue its claim against Meta Platforms Inc, whose principal place of business is outside the court's jurisdiction. Blink argues that Facebook India's role in its business dealings gives a Mumbai court grounds to hear the case.

What the dispute is about

Meta disabled four of Blink Digital's Business Manager accounts and the agency's linked corporate pages on Facebook and Instagram on 3 August 2026. Blink is seeking their restoration and ₹1,158 crore in damages, and is also challenging how fair and enforceable Meta's contract terms are.

Meta has said in court that it acted over alleged breaches of its advertising policies and contract terms, BestMediaInfo reported. Those claims have not been tested by the court. At a hearing on 17 September, Meta undertook to preserve data linked to the disabled accounts.

What happens next

The court will hear Blink's application for temporary relief, including restoration of the four accounts, on 2 November 2026 at 4 pm, with about an hour for each side. Kunal Dwarkadas appears for Blink Digital and Senior Advocate Janak Dwarkadas for Meta.

The case adds to Meta's growing list of disputes with Indian authorities and businesses, from the IT Ministry's demand that it review its feed algorithms to publisher objections to its new business terms.

Questions readers ask

What did the Bombay High Court decide in the Meta–Blink Digital case?

On 27 October 2026, Justice Sandeep V Marne dismissed Meta's application to return Blink Digital's plaint, which argued that only California courts could hear the dispute. The case will continue in Mumbai.

Why is Blink Digital suing Meta?

Meta disabled four of Blink Digital's Business Manager accounts and linked Facebook and Instagram pages on 3 August 2026. The agency wants them restored and is claiming ₹1,158 crore in damages.

Why did Meta disable Blink Digital's accounts?

Meta has said in court that it acted over alleged breaches of its advertising policies and contract terms. These are allegations, and the court has not yet ruled on them.

When is the next hearing in the Blink Digital vs Meta case?

The Bombay High Court will hear Blink Digital's application for temporary relief, including restoring its accounts, on 2 November 2026 at 4 pm.

PRPressRoom DeskNewsroomThe PressRoom newsroom covers the business of media, entertainment, technology and startups across India and the Gulf.
Free newsletter

The PressRoom Briefing

The day's most important media, entertainment, tech and business stories, in your inbox every morning.