JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral) - This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. In the present patent infringement suit, the Plaintiff-Nokia Technologies OY has asserted that three of its patents which are claimed to be Standard Essential Patents (hereinafter `SEPs') in the field of mobile telecommunications, are being infringed upon by the Defendants. The details of the suit patents asserted in the present suit are set out below:

S.No.Patent No.Grant Title1IN 269929Method Providing Multiplexing for Data Non-Associated Control Channel2IN 286352System and Method for Providing AMR-WB DTX Synchronization3IN 300066Additional Modulation Information Signaling for High-Speed Downlink Packet Access

3. According to Nokia, the above suit patents are essential for implementing technology that ensures mobile phones and cellular systems are compliant with 2G, 3G, 4G, and 5G standards. Nokia further claims that the Defendants, in the mobile phones they manufacture, assemble, or import, utilize 2G, 3G, 4G, and 5G technology. Accordingly, Nokia claims that Oppo, is an unauthorised user of the suit patents and therefore infringing the suit patents. Additionally, Nokia contends that the Defendants are ex-licensees for their portfolio of SEPs and were delaying the renewal of the license agreement and have failed to present any reasonable counter-offers.

4. The present suit has been filed against five Defendants, the list of all the Defendants is set out below in a tabular form:

S.No.Name of the DefendantDefendant No. (As per Memo of Parties)1Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., LtdDefendant No. 12Oppo Mobiles India Private LimitedDefendant No. 23Realme Mobile Telecommunication (India) Private LimitedDefendant No. 34Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd.Defendant No. 45Oneplus Technology India Pvt. Ltd.Defendant No. 5

5. Initially, submissions were made by both parties in relation to an application, I.A. 7700/2021 moved by Nokia seeking pro-tem deposits under Order XXXIX Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), and judgement was reserved in the said application on the said application on 23rd December, 2021. Thereafter, this Court commenced the hearing on the application I.A. 7699/2021 seeking injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2. Similar applications seeking injunction in CS (COMM) 304/2021, CS (COMM) 162/2022, CS (COMM) 171/2022 were consolidated and submissions from all parties on the injunction applications were heard at length, in camera. Considering that issues of infringement, invalidity, essentiality, FRAND compliance, etc. were all raised, the Court had heard submissions of the parties over the course of eleven hearings from 18th May, 2022 to 11th November, 2022.

6. Vide judgement dated 17th November, 2022, judgement in the application, I.A. 7700/2021 seeking pro-tem deposit was delivered. In the said judgement, a ld. Single Judge of this Court held that Nokia had not established a sufficient basis for an order of deposits, considering the pleadings on record and submissions made before the Court. Thereafter, further submissions were heard by this Court on 15th April, 2023 (Saturday) and 6th May, 2023 (Saturday) in the application seeking interim injunction in all the connected suits. Following these hearings, oral arguments were concluded by the parties and on 6th May, 2023 and judgment was reserved in the interim injunction applications across all the four connected suits by this Court.

7. In the interregnum, Nokia challenged the decision of the ld. Single Judge in I.A. 7700/2021 seeking pro-tem deposit before the ld. Division Bench of this Court in FAO(OS)(COMM) 321/2022 titled Nokia Technologies OY v. Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd. & Ors.. Vide judgement dated 3rd July, 2023, the ld. Division Bench allowed the appeal preferred by Nokia. After considering the past license agreement which was entered into between the parties, the ld. Division Bench directed OPPO to deposit 23% of the t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document