2022/DHC/004746

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: 17^th August, 2022

Date of decision: 10^th November, 2022

+

C.O.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 3/2021 & I.As. 13644/2021, 3420/2022

DR. REDDYS LABORATORIES LIMITED & ANR …Petitioners

Through:

Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Mr. Avinash Kr.

Sharma, Advocates.(M:7289036972)

versus

THE CONTROLLER OF PATENTS & ORS.,

……Respondents

Through:

Mr.

Harish

Vaidyanathan

Shankar,CGSC, Mr. Srish Kumar

Mishra,

Mr.Alexander

Mathai

Paikaday and Mr.Sagar Mehlawat,

Advocates for UOI.

Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with

Mr.

Sanjay

Kumar,

Ms.

ArpitaSawhney,

Mr.

Priyansh

Sharma, Ms.Meenal Khurana, Mr.

Tabhay Tandonand Mr. Arun Kumar,

Advocates forR-2. (M:9810404749)

WITH

+

C.O. (COMM.IPD-PAT) 1/2022 & I.A.3570/2022

THYSSENKRUPP ROTHE ERDE GERMANY GMBH .. Petitioner

Through:

Mr.

Pranaynath

Jha,

Mr.

MaheshKumar, Ms. Simran Soni &

Mr.Anubha Pandey, Advocate.

(M:9958944848)

versus

THE CONTROLLER OF PATENTS & ANR. …….Respondents

Through:

Mr.

Harish

Vaidyanathan

Shankar,CGSC, Mr. Srish Kumar

Mishra,

Mr.Alexander

Mathai

Paikaday and Mr.Sagar Mehlawat,

Advocates for UOI.(M:9810758606)

Mr. Bharath M.S., Mr. AyushSharma,

Digitally Signed

By:DEVANSHU JOSHI

Signing Date:10.11.2022

18:22:46

Signature Not Verified

2022/DHC/004746

Advocates for R-2.(M:9899096069)

AND

+

C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 169/2022& I.As. 8920/2022, 8921/2022

ELTA SYSTEMS LTD.

….Appellant

Through:

Ms. Rajeshwari H. and Mr.Deepanshu

Nagar, Advocate.(M:8826968200)

versus

THE CONTROLLER OF PATENTS

….Respondent

Through:

Mr.

Harish

Vaidyanathan

Shankar,CGSC, Mr. Srish Kumar

Mishra,

Mr.Alexander

Mathai

Paikaday and Mr.Sagar Mehlawat,

Advocates for UOI.

Mr. Adarsh Ramanujan& Mr. Aditya

Gupta, Advocates assisting the Court.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

JUDGMENT

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. Issues of maintainability have been raised in these three proceedings

under the Patents Act, 1970(hereinafter ‗1970 Act‘). There are two

categories of cases:

i.

C.O.(COMM.IPD-PAT) No.3/2021 and C.O.(COMM.IPD-

PAT) No.1/2022 are revocation petitions seeking revocation of

granted patents under Section 64 of the 1970 Act;

ii.

C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 169/2022 is an appeal under Section

117A of the 1970 Act.

3. The enactment of the Tribunal Reforms Act 2021 (hereinafter

‗TRA‘)resulted in the abolishing of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board

(hereinafter ‗IPAB‘). All matters which were pending before the IPAB stood

Digitally Signed

By:DEVANSHU JOSHI

Signing Date:10.11.2022

18:22:46

Signature Not Verified

2022/DHC/004746

transferred to the High Courts. Post the TRA,jurisdiction in respect of

appeals and revocation petitions under the 1970 Act has now been

transferred back to High Courts.However, the question has arisenas to

whether all High Courts can entertain revocation petitions and appeals. How

is jurisdiction in respect of such matters to be determined?

4. Owing to the importance and the impact of the issues raised, apart

from ld. Counsel for the parties, various other counsels practising in the field

of Intellectual Property law have also made submissions for the assistance of

the Court.

Factsinbriefin

C.O.(COMM.IPD-PAT)

3/2021

titled

Dr.

Reddy’s

Laboratories Limited& Anr. v. The Controller of Patents& Anr.

5. The present revocation petition under section 64 of the 1970 Act has

been filed by Petitioner No.1- Dr. Reddy‟s Laboratories Limited, and

Petitioner No.2- MSN Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. seeking revocation of patent

no. IN 268846 granted in favour of Respondent No.2- Boehringer Ingelheim

International GmbH (hereinafter ‗Boehringer‘).

6. Boehringer applied for a patent for certain Benzenol derivatives and

medicinal preparations containing the said derivatives. The patent

application bearing no. 4844/DELNP/2006 was filed through the PCT route

on 23^rd August, 2006 in the Patent Office, Delhi. The s