Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AMIT BANSAL
Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Controller Of Patents – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AMIT BANSAL, J.
I.A. 7635/2024 (under Section 151 of CPC) I.A. 46685/2024 (under Section 151 of CPC)
1. The captioned applications have been filed by the respondent no.2 seeking dismissal of the present petition.
2. The following issues arise for adjudication in the two applications:
(i) Whether a revocation petition can be held to be not maintainable if the petitioner has filed a written statement, taking a defence of invalidity of the suit patent under Section 107 of the Patents Act, in an infringement suit filed by the patentee.
(ii) Whether a revocation petition can be filed or sustained (if already filed) after the expiry of the term of the patent.
PREFATORY FACTS
3. The petitioner, Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., is engaged in manufacturing and marketing of diverse pharmaceutical products including anti-diabetic drugs.
4. The respondent no. 2, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, is a company organized and existing under the laws of Germany. It is engaged in the business of developing, manufacturing and marketing pharmaceuticals worldwide including India.
5. The present revocation petition was filed by the petitioner under Section 64(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 (herein
A revocation petition under Section 64 of the Patents Act can be maintained even after the patent's expiry, as the petitioner qualifies as a 'person interested' and the cause of action for damages su....
A party contesting the validity of a patent must pursue claims via counter-claims in ongoing infringement suits, preventing unnecessary forum shopping.
The court clarified the jurisdiction for filing revocation petitions, the power of consolidation and transfer of proceedings between High Courts, and the maintainability of revocation petitions befor....
There is no limitation period for filing a patent revocation petition under Section 64 of the Patents Act, enabling any interested person to challenge a patent anytime during its life.
No specific limitation period prescribed for seeking revocation under Section 64 of the Patents Act.
No specific limitation period prescribed for seeking revocation under Section 64 of the Patents Act.
The validity of a patent cannot be challenged without adequate pleadings and evidence supporting claims of invalidity; insufficient disclosures must be substantiated by facts.
The right to cancel a trademark under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act is independent of ongoing infringement suits and remains available for invocation regardless of related Section 124 implication....
The unilateral cancellation of the settlement deed by the parents is illegal and without jurisdiction. The cancellation of settlement deed by the parents is non-est in law. The suit filed in the year....
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
