{"id":299063,"date":"2023-08-11T11:00:01","date_gmt":"2023-08-11T05:30:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=299063"},"modified":"2023-08-14T17:16:44","modified_gmt":"2023-08-14T11:46:44","slug":"delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/","title":{"rendered":"Revocation Petition under Section 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/b> In a case wherein, the application was filed by Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH (Respondent 2) under Section 10<\/a> of Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> (‘CPC’) seeking stay of proceedings in the present revocation petition, filed by the petitioners under Section 64<\/a> of the Patents Act, 1970<\/a> (‘Patents Act’), C. Hari Shankar, J.*,<\/b> held that it could not be said that, even on merits, any case existed for staying the present revocation petition and accordingly, dismissed the application.<\/p>\n

Background<\/b><\/p>\n

In the instant case, Revocation petition was filed by the petitioners electronically. The petition sought revocation of IN 268846 (“IN’846”) granted to Respondent 2, in respect of “Glucopyranosyl-substituted Benzenol derivatives, drugs containing said compounds, the use thereof and method for the production thereof’”.<\/p>\n

As against this, the suit was filed by Respondent 2, asserting IN’846 and alleging infringement, by the petitioners, of the said patent. The suit was filed by Respondent 2 before the Himachal Pradesh High Court on 19-10-2021, three days after the present revocation petition was electronically filed by the petitioner before this Court, wherein ex-parte stay was granted by the Himachal Pradesh High Court. Respondent 2 filed a second suit against the petitioners on 21-10-2021, where again stay was granted by the Himachal Pradesh High Court.<\/p>\n

Respondent 2 contended that the issues in controversy in the present revocation petition and in the suit filed by Respondent 2 against the petitioners before the Himachal Pradesh High Court, were not only overlapping but were identical. Therefore, the respondent submitted that on merits, a clear case for stay of the present revocation proceedings was made out to avoid the possibility of conflicting decisions.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/b><\/p>\n

On considering an issue that whether a revocation petition could be treated as a suit for the purposes of Section 10<\/a> of the CPC<\/a>, the Court relied on Raju Jhurani<\/i> v. Germinda Pvt. Ltd.<\/i>, (2012) 8 SCC 563<\/a> and opined that where provisions of CPC<\/a> which deal with suits, were sought to be invoked with respect to proceedings instituted under other statutes, such proceedings were not to be treated as suits.<\/p>\n

The Court also noted that attention of the Court had not been drawn to any provision which either in the CPC<\/a> or in any of the rules governing the Court including the Intellectual Property Division Rules and the Patent Rules, which, either expressly or by necessary implication, treated a revocation petition under Section 64<\/a> of the Patents Act<\/a> as a suit for the purposes of Section 10<\/a> of the CPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that in absence of any provision by which a revocation petition under Section 64<\/a> of the Patents Act<\/a> could be treated as a suit, a Court could not deem a revocation petition to be a suit. Deeming fictions, and the creation of deeming fictions, were generally the exclusive province of the legislature. The Court could not create a deeming fiction on its own, where the statute did not do so.<\/p>\n

The Court, further opined that the final reason why the revocation petition could not be treated as a suit under Section 10<\/a> of CPC<\/a> was that, even if it applies in the facts of a particular case, Section 10 did not bring to a halt the proceedings in a suit, it only stays the trial of the suit. Even in a case where Section 10 applied, the Court which was seized of the later suit might still pass interlocutory orders under Order XXXIX of the CPC<\/a> and other cognate provisions.<\/p>\n

Therefore, the Court opined that a revocation petition under Section 64<\/a> of the Patents Act<\/a> was not a suit within the meaning of Section 10<\/a> of the CPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Further on considering the issue that whether a case for stay was made out even on merits, the Court opined that one fundamental difference between the proceeding for revocation of a patent under Section 64<\/a> of the Patents Act<\/a> and a civil suit by a patent holder, seeking injunction against infringement of the patent under Section 104<\/a> of the Patents Act<\/a> is that, if a revocation proceeding succeeded, the patent was deleted from the register of patents. Whereas, in an infringement suit, the patent did not stand extinguished. The only result was that the injunction sought would not be granted.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that the relief which would result, in the event of the challenge to the patent, in the revocation proceedings and in the written statement filed by way of response to the suit, succeeding, was completely different.<\/p>\n

Thereafter, relying on Aspi Jal<\/i> v. Khushroo Rustom Dadyburjor<\/i>, (2013) 4 SCC 333<\/a> and National Institute of Mental Health & Neuro Sciences<\/i> v. C. Parameshwara<\/i>, (2005) 2 SCC 256<\/a>, the Court opined that it could not be said that, even on merits, any case existed for staying the present revocation petition pending the outcome of the suit instituted in the Himachal Pradesh High Court.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the present application under Section 10<\/a> of the CPC<\/a> was dismissed.<\/p>\n

The matter to be re-notified on 24-08-2023.<\/p>\n

[Dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd. v. The Controller of Patents, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 4701<\/a>, decided on 03-08-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment by- Justice C. Hari Shankar<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Petitioners: J. Sai Deepak, G. Nataraj, Shashi Kant Yadav and Rahul Bhujbal, Advocates;<\/p>\n

For the Respondents: Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Srish Kumar Mishra,Sagar Mehlawat and Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Advocates; Ashok Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Sanjay Kumar, Arpita Sawhney, Arun Kumar Jana, Meenal Khurana, Harshit Dixit and Priyansh Sharma, Advocates.<\/p>\n

Buy Patents Act, 1970  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"patents<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“The Court cannot create a deeming fiction on its own, where the statute does not do so. In the absence of any provision which deems a revocation petition under Section 64 of the Patents Act to be a suit, a Court cannot, even in the interests of expediency, so hold.”<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":293503,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[27414,49609,46415,60159,57518,60190,31861],"class_list":["post-299063","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cpc","tag-delhi-hc","tag-patent-act","tag-revocation-petition","tag-section-10","tag-section-64","tag-suit"],"yoast_head":"\nRevocation Petition u\/s 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi HC| SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court opined that the power to transfer revocation petitions between two High Courts can only be exercised in terms of Section 25 of Civil Procedure Code.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Revocation Petition under Section 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court opined that the power to transfer revocation petitions between two High Courts can only be exercised in terms of Section 25 of Civil Procedure Code.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-08-11T05:30:01+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-08-14T11:46:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Revocation Petition under Section 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/\",\"name\":\"Revocation Petition u\/s 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi HC| SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-08-11T05:30:01+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-08-14T11:46:44+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court opined that the power to transfer revocation petitions between two High Courts can only be exercised in terms of Section 25 of Civil Procedure Code.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"delhi high court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Revocation Petition under Section 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Revocation Petition u\/s 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi HC| SCC Blog","description":"Delhi High Court opined that the power to transfer revocation petitions between two High Courts can only be exercised in terms of Section 25 of Civil Procedure Code.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Revocation Petition under Section 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi High Court","og_description":"Delhi High Court opined that the power to transfer revocation petitions between two High Courts can only be exercised in terms of Section 25 of Civil Procedure Code.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-08-11T05:30:01+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-08-14T11:46:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Revocation Petition under Section 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/","name":"Revocation Petition u\/s 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi HC| SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp","datePublished":"2023-08-11T05:30:01+00:00","dateModified":"2023-08-14T11:46:44+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Delhi High Court opined that the power to transfer revocation petitions between two High Courts can only be exercised in terms of Section 25 of Civil Procedure Code.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"delhi high court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/11\/delhi-hc-revocation-petition-u-s-64-patents-act-is-not-a-suit-within-the-meaning-s10-cpc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Revocation Petition under Section 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":298994,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/10\/delhi-hc-power-transfer-proceedings-between-high-courts-is-exclusively-vested-in-the-sc-u-s25-cpc\/","url_meta":{"origin":299063,"position":0},"title":"Power to transfer proceedings between High Courts u\/s 25 of CPC is exclusively vested in Supreme Court: Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"August 10, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe Delhi High Court cannot exercise power to transfer proceedings between two separate High Courts as the said power of transfer between two High Courts, can be exercised in terms of Section 25 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, by only the Supreme Court.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6524,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/06\/12\/provision-relating-to-revocation-of-patent-under-the-patent-act-1970-interpreted\/","url_meta":{"origin":299063,"position":1},"title":"Provision relating to revocation of patent under the Patent Act, 1970 interpreted","author":"Sucheta","date":"June 12, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: While interpreting the Section 64 of the Patents Act, 1970 (Act) as to whether both the remedies for revocation of patents provided in Section 64 of the Act can be availed simultaneously for the same purpose, the bench of A.K. Patnaik and Jagdish Singh Khehar, JJ held that\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Supreme Court"","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6208,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/06\/12\/provision-relating-to-revocation-of-patent-under-the-patent-act-1970-interpreted\/","url_meta":{"origin":299063,"position":2},"title":"Provision relating to revocation of patent under the Patent Act, 1970 interpreted","author":"Sucheta","date":"June 12, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: While interpreting the Section 64 of the Patents Act, 1970 (Act) as to whether both the remedies for revocation of patents provided in Section 64 of the Act can be availed simultaneously for the same purpose, the bench of A.K. Patnaik and Jagdish Singh Khehar, JJ held that\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Intellectual Property"","block_context":{"text":"Intellectual Property","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/intellectual_property\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":57381,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/20\/mere-registration-of-criminal-case-cannot-be-a-ground-for-revocation-of-arms-license-under-section-17-of-arms-act-1959\/","url_meta":{"origin":299063,"position":3},"title":"Mere registration of criminal case cannot be a ground for revocation of arms license under Section 17 of Arms Act, 1959","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 20, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: Allowing petition filed by member of a political party challenging revocation of his arms license by the Police Commissioner, the Division Bench of Naresh H. Patil and Prakash D. Naik JJ. held that revocation of arms license for the security of public peace or for public safety\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":311235,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/11\/dhc-sets-aside-single-judges-order-affirming-revocation-of-pepsicos-registration-for-potato-variety-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":299063,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court sets aside Single Judge\u2019s order affirming revocation of PepsiCo\u2019s registration for potato variety FL 2027 used in Lay\u2019s chips","author":"Simranjeet","date":"January 11, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt will be wholly arbitrary and illogical to accord a judicial imprimatur to an order of revocation which is founded on a factor which has no material bearing on the ultimate grant or which fails to meet the tests of fundamental ineligibility and invalidity.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":251308,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/07\/15\/succession-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":299063,"position":5},"title":"Del HC | Under S. 263 of Succession Act, can a person approach High Court for grant of probate or letter of administration or revocation or annulment? HC addresses the issue","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 15, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Mukta Gupta, J., decides a matter revolving around the Will of a deceased person. Factual Background Instant suit was filed by two brothers\u2019 owners of the suit property. The brothers mentioned were brothers of Late Shanti Swaroop Gupta. Defendants submitted that the deceased left a Will in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/299063","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=299063"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/299063\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/293503"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=299063"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=299063"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=299063"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}