Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J
Adiuvo Diagnostics Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
ORDER :
This writ petition raises the question as to whether discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may be exercised in respect of an order rejecting a pre-grant opposition.
2. The 4th respondent herein filed Indian Patent Application No.9067/DELNP/2010 in respect of the invention titled 'Device and Method for Fluorescence-based Imaging and Monitoring'. The petitioner lodged a pre-grant opposition in respect thereof and such opposition was rejected while granting the patent by impugned order dated 19.07.2023. The present writ petition was filed in the said facts and circumstances.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order disregards material evidence and is completely unreasoned thereby justifying interference under Article 226. The first contention of learned counsel was that evidence placed on record by both parties finds no mention in the impugned order. In particular, learned counsel points out that the petitioner had placed on record the affidavit of Mr.Ananth Krishnan and, subsequently, the affidavit of Dr. Balasubramaniyam Pesala. After pointing out that these were affidavits of persons skilled in the art (PSITA),
The court held that a writ petition can challenge a patent order despite alternative remedies, emphasizing the need for reasoned decisions in patent matters.
Quasi-judicial orders under Patents Act dismissing post-grant oppositions must provide cogent reasons and technical analysis under Section 25(2)(c); unreasoned orders are set aside and remanded.
The right to oppose a patent application is a statutory right that must be honored, even if the opposition is not submitted in the correct format.
Patent examination under Chapter IV (mandatory Section 14 hearing) and pre-grant opposition under Section 25(1) (Chapter V) are distinct parallel processes; refusal requires Section 14 hearing and Se....
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....
Patents Act requires adherence to procedures in post-grant oppositions, emphasizing natural justice and timely resolutions to prevent delays in patent adjudication.
An order passed by the Civil Court is amenable to scrutiny by the High Court only in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, and no letters patent appeal would be mai....
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
