Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Novo Nordisk A S – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner/Patentee-Novo Nordisk (hereinafter `Patentee') challenging the order dated 29th June 2022 passed by the ld. Deputy Controller of Patents & Designs (hereinafter `Deputy Controller'). The said order was passed by the ld. Deputy Controller on the representation dated 13th May, 2022 made by the Patentee in the post grant opposition proceedings qua patent no. IN257402.
2. The said order on the representation, arises out of order dated 3rd June, 2022 passed in W.P.(C)-IPD 14/2022 titled Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Union of India and W.P.(C)-IPD 15/2022 titled Novo Nordisk A S v. Union of India. In the said order, the Court issued directions to the Patent Office in the following terms:
"9. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel and the other learned counsels for the respective parties, the following directions are passed:
(a) Representation dated 13.05.2022 filed by the Petitioner in W.P.(C)IPD 15/2022 shall be decided by the Competent Authority, within a period of two weeks from today. Needless to state the representation shall be decided in accordance with law.
(b)Insofar as t
Patents Act requires adherence to procedures in post-grant oppositions, emphasizing natural justice and timely resolutions to prevent delays in patent adjudication.
The recommendation of the Opposition Board is not binding, and a writ petition challenging it is not maintainable; objections can be raised during hearings before the Controller.
The court highlighted the importance of timely adjudication in patent opposition proceedings and mandated adherence to procedural timelines.
The need for a systematic manner in conducting pre-grant oppositions and the right to file affidavits of own experts in rebuttal.
The non-binding nature of Opposition Board recommendations and the Controller's discretion in deciding the qualitative merit of the recommendations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that amendments made to patent claims at the instance of the Controller, pursuant to the directions of the Controller, do not violate the principle....
Procedural irregularities in patent opposition must respect principles of natural justice, and amendments to patent claims cannot broaden their scope.
A patent adjudication must be supported by a reasoned order to ensure fairness and facilitate judicial review.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
