AIR 1934 Bom 407 Brief Facts: Plaintiff, a chemist, in 1927 started with one Girdhanlal, brother of Defendant, a partnership concern being Jarivalla Shah & Co. In this firm, Defendant was a clerk. The firm had an experimental branch under the namr Jasco & Co., lead by one Dr. Patel. In August, 1928, Plaintiff left…
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 159 of the Patents Act, 1970, the Central Government has on 19th October, 2020 amended the Patents Rules, 2003 vide the Patents (Amendment) Rules 2020. The key changes to the Patents Rules, 2003 by the Patents (Amendment) Rules 2020 are: 1. Rule 21 which deals with the ‘Filing…
Date of Decision: 20th July, 2020 (IPAB) Brief facts On 17.07.2002, the Appellant had filed a patent application entitled “Method and Device for Accessing Information Sources and Services of the Web”. On 19.11.2004, the Appellant requested for the examination for the patent application which was rejected on the ground that it lacked an inventive step….
SEASON 1 BONUS EPISODE – 3rd August, 2020 On the fine morning of 2ndof August 2020, Mr. Ankit Rastogi woke me up from my bed, to discuss not so much of a eureka moment. He wanted me to provide him an off the cuff patentability analysis of the invisibility band used by Mr. Arun Verma…
Monsanto Holdings Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Competition Commission of India & Ors. Date of decision: 20th May, 2020 in W.P. (C) No. 1776/2016 and W.P.(C) No. 3556/2017 by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi Brief Facts: Petitioners, had developed an advance technology of manufacturing Bt. Cotton seeds which they licensed and…
Bayer Corporation and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. and Bayer Intellectual Property Gmbh & Anr. v. Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 2019 (78) PTC 521 (Del); Division Bench Brief Facts 1: NATCO Dispute Bayer Corporation (hereinafter ‘Bayer’) filed a suit for infringement of Patent against Natco. During the pendency of the suit, Natco obtained a…
Bayer Corporation v. Union of India & Ors. 2014 (60) PTC 277 (Bom) BRIEF FACTS: The Petitioner had filed the present petition[1] being aggrieved by the order of the Hon’ble Intellectual Property Appellate Board (hereinafter ‘IPAB’) dated 4th March, 2013 vide which IPAB upheld the order of the Controller of Patents dated 9th March, 2012…
Cipla Limited v. Novartis AG and Ors. 2017 (70) PTC 80 (Del) Respondents (Novartis AG and Ors.) filed a suit for permanent injunction seeking to restrain the Appellant (Cipla Ltd.) from infringing its Patent. Along with the suit, Respondents had also filed an application for interim relief of temporary injunction during the pendency of the…
Novartis AG and Anr. v. Cipla Ltd. I.A. No.24863/2014 IN CS(OS) No. 3812/2014 Date of decision: 09.01.2015 Delhi High Court Plaintiff held a Patent for INDACATEROL (for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease). Plaintiff filed a suit against the Defendant towards infringement of the said Patent. On 22nd October, 2014 the Defendant made a representation to the…
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. & Ors. v. Natco Pharma Ltd. 2014 (59) PTC 124 Appellant had a process Patent. Appellant filed a quia timet suit before the Delhi High Court towards infringement of Patent as the Respondent was in the process of exporting the product manufactured by the process covered in the Patent. Respondent filed…
Strix Limited Vs. Maharaja Appliances Limited I.A. No. 7441 of 2008 in C.S. (OS) No. 1206 of 2008 Decided On: 10.09.2009 Facts: Plaintiff had a product patent in respect of ‘Liquid Heating Vessels’. Plaintiff claimed that Strix U10 Series Controls were sold by it first in 1996. Claims in the Patent: The principal claim of…
Major (Retired) Sukesh Behl & Anr. v. Koninklijke Philips Electronics Before the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi FAO(OS) No. 16 of 2014 The present Appeal was filed by the Appellants as the Appellant’s application under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Judgment on admission) was dismissed by the…