Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 8831
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :13 October 2023 Pronounced on :16 October 2023 + W.P.(C)-IPD 61/2021 AYUR UNITED CARE LLP ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
Mr. Ajay Sahni, Mr. Ankit Sahni, Mr. Chirag Ahluwalia and Mr. Mohit Maru, dvs.
for R-2 + W.P.(C)-IPD 63/2021 & CM APPL. 15721/2013 AYUR UNITED CARE LLP ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
+ W.P.(C)-IPD 78/2021, CM APPL. 12922/2013 & CM APPL.
12924/2013 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C)-IPD 61/2021 & contd. matters Page 1 of 48 Digitally Signed AYUR UNITED CARE LLP ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
Mr. Arvind Varma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Mr. Afzal B. Khan and Mr. Samik Mukherjee and Mr. Debjyoti Sarkar, Advocates for R-2 + W.P.(C)-IPD 80/2021, CM APPL. 12929/2013 & CM APPL.
12931/2013 AYUR UNITED CARE LLP ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
Mr. Arvind Varma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Mr. Afzal B. Khan and Mr. Samik Mukherjee and Mr. Debjyoti Sarkar, Advocates for R-2 + W.P.(C)-IPD 86/2021 & CM APPL. 12916/2013 AYUR UNITED CARE LLP ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya Signature Not Verified W.P.(C)-IPD 61/2021 & contd. matters Page 2 of 48 Digitally Signed and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
Mr. Arvind Varma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Mr. Afzal B. Khan and Mr. Samik Mukherjee and Mr. Debjyoti Sarkar, Advocates for R-2 + W.P.(C)-IPD 65/2021, CM APPL. 2842/2010, CM APPL.
17123/2017, I.A. 2520/2022, I.A. 2539/2022 & I.A. 2544/2022 M H POLYMERS PVT.LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sushant Singh, Mr. Akshat Gupta and Mr. Saurav Pattanaik, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vikram Jetly, CGSC with Ms. Shreya Jetly, Advs. for R-1 Mr. Akhil Sibal, Sr. Advocate as Amicus Curiae with Ms. Asavari Jain and Ms. Sanya Kumar, Advs.
Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr. Krishnan V, Advs.
+ W.P.(C)-IPD 75/2021 THREE N-PRODUCT PVT LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
Signature Not Verified W.P.(C)-IPD 61/2021 & contd. matters Page 3 of 48 Digitally Signed versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
Mr. Arvind Varma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Mr. Afzal B. Khan and Mr. Samik Mukherjee and Mr. Debjyoti Sarkar, Advocates for R-2 + W.P.(C)-IPD 87/2021 AYUR UNITED CARE LLP ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
+ W.P.(C)-IPD 95/2021, CM APPL. 12935/2013 & CM APPL.
12937/2013 THREE N-PRODUCTS PVT TLD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Signature Not Verified W.P.(C)-IPD 61/2021 & contd. matters Page 4 of 48 Digitally Signed Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
Mr. Arvind Varma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Mr. Afzal B. Khan and Mr.
Samik Mukherjee, Advocates for R-2 + W.P.(C)-IPD 97/2021, CM APPL. 15749/2013 & CM APPL.
15751/2013 THREE N-PRODUCTS PVT. LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
+ W.P.(C)-IPD 98/2021 THREE N-PRODUCT ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Mahabir, Mr. P.C. Arya and Mr. Noopur Biswas, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. Sriram and Mr.
Krishnan V, Advs.
Mr. Ajay Sahni, Mr. Ankit Sahni, Mr. Chirag Ahluwalia and Mr. Mohit Maru, dvs.
for R-2 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C)-IPD 61/2021 & contd. matters Page 5 of 48 Digitally Signed CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
JUDGMENT
% 16.10.2023 The Issue in Controversy
1. This judgment addresses the issue of whether writ petitions, challenging orders passed by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), filed before abolition of the IPAB on 4 April 2021, would have to be heard by a Single Bench or by a Division Bench of this Court.
2. By order dated 28 June 2013, the learned Intellectual Property Appellate Board (the IPAB) has allowed rectification petitions filed by the second respondent, challenging the registration of the mark “AYUR” in favour of the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petitions under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
3. A serious preliminary objection has been advanced by the respondents, to the effect that these petitions have necessarily to be listed before a Division Bench of this Court and cannot be heard by a Single Judge.
4. The petitioners submit, per contra, that these writ petitions have necessarily to be heard by a Single Judge and cannot, per statute, be Signature Not Verified W.P.(C)-IPD 61/2021 & contd. matters Page 6 of 48 Digitally Signed initially listed before a Division Bench.
5. Mr. Sibal and Mr. Sushant Singh proposed certain alternative options which I would deal with at the appropriate stage.
Rival submissions
6. I have heard Mr. Arvind Varma, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent 2 in W.P.(C)-IPD 75/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 78/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 80/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 85/2021 and W.P.(C)- IPD 95/2021 and Mr. J. Sai Deepak, learned Counsel also appearing for Respondent 2 in W.P.(C)-IPD 75/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 78/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 80/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 85/2021 and W.P.(C)-IPD 95/2021, Mr. Chander M. Lall and Mr. Akhil Sibal, learned Senior Counsel who appear as amicus curiae, as well as Mr. N. Mahabir for the petitioner in W.P.(C)-IPD 61/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 63/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 75/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 80/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 86/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 87/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 95/2021, W.P.(C)-IPD 97/2021 and W.P.(C)-IPD 98/2021 and Mr. Sushant Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C)-IPD 65/2021.
7. Mr. Varma, Mr. Sibal, Mr. Sai Deepak and Mr. Sushant Singh contend that these matters should be listed before the Division Bench. Of said learned Counsel, Mr. Varma, Mr. Sibal and Mr. Sushant Singh follow a more tempered line of argument. They do not contend that a learned Single Judge would not have jurisdiction to deal with these petitions, but submit that it would be more appropriate that they are Signature Not Verified W.P.(C)-IPD 61/2021 & contd. matters Page 7 of 48 Digitally Signed listed before a Division Bench. Mr. Sai Deepak adopts a more rigid stance and submits that these matters have, per statute, necessarily to be listed before a Division Bench and that a learned Single Judge would not possess jurisdiction to decide these writ petitions. I am, therefore, according to Mr. J. Sai Deepak, coram non judice.
8. Submissions of Mr. J. Sai Deepak
8.1 Mr. Sai Deepak invited my attention to Rules 41, 2(l)2 and 8(iii)3 of the Intellectual Property Division (IPD) Rules, 2021 (“IPD Rules” hereinafter). and Rule 1(xviii)(a) and (b)4 and Rule 45 in Part B in 1 4. Jurisdiction – Every IPR subject matter or case or proceeding or dispute filed before, or transferred to, the IPD, as defined in Rules 2(i), 2(j) and 2(l), shall be heard and adjudicated by a Single Judge of the IPD except those that are to be decided by a Division Bench as per Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
2 (l) “IPR subject matters or cases or proceedings or disputes” shall include all original proceedings, appellate and other proceedings related to IPR subject matter(s) as defined in Rule 2(i) above filed before the IPD and shall also include:
(i) IPR suits, revocation applications, cancellation applications, other original proceedings, appeals and petitions from the various IPOs and all other proceedings which were hitherto maintainable before the Intellectual Property Appellate Bo
