{"id":378149,"date":"2026-03-12T12:00:20","date_gmt":"2026-03-12T06:30:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=378149"},"modified":"2026-03-13T17:44:24","modified_gmt":"2026-03-13T12:14:24","slug":"delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi HC upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk\u2019s injunction plea; Allows Dr. Reddy\u2019s to manufacture and import \u2018Semaglutide\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> While hearing a challenge against the judgment dated 2 December 2025 (impugned judgment), wherein the Single Judge had rejected the application for an interlocutory injunction restraining the respondents Dr. Reddy’s from manufacturing or selling Semaglutide, an anti-diabetic, the Division Bench of *C. Hari Shankar<\/span> and Om Prakash Shukla, JJ, held that the respondents had raised a credible challenge to the validity of the suit patent under Section 64(1)(e<\/span>) and (f<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act, 1970<\/a> (Patents Act) and hence, allowed Dr. Reddy’s to manufacture and import ‘Semaglutide’.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the Court upheld the impugned judgment and dismissed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The dispute arose out of a patent held by the appellant over Semaglutide, an anti-diabetic medication used in the treatment of diabetes. The appellant had stated that in December 2024 it learned that the respondents had been importing Semaglutide into India. The appellant had alleged that such importation amounted to an infringement of its patent rights.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, in 2025, the appellant had instituted a patent infringement suit against the respondents. Along with the suit, the appellant had filed an application seeking an interlocutory injunction to restrain the respondents from manufacturing, importing, marketing, or selling Semaglutide in the Indian market during the pendency of the proceedings.<\/p>\n

The respondents did not dispute that they had been importing and exporting Semaglutide<\/span>, and therefore acknowledged that their actions, in a strict sense, amounted to infringement of the suit patent. However, they relied on Section 107(1)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a><\/span>, which allowed a defendant in an infringement suit to challenge the validity of the patent as a defence. They contended that the suit patent was liable to be declared invalid under Section 64(1)(<\/span>a<\/span>), (e<\/span>), (f<\/span>), and (k<\/span>) of the Act.<\/p>\n

The Single Judge had examined the respondents’ plea of prima facie invalidity<\/span> under Section<\/span> 64(1)(a<\/span>), (e<\/span>), and (f<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a> in sequence and, vide judgment dated 2 December 2025, found that the respondents had raised a credible challenge<\/span> to the validity of the suit patent. Accordingly, the Single Judge had rejected the application for interim injunction. Aggrieved by the refusal to grant interim relief, the appellant preferred the present appeal.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court disagreed with the Single Judge’s finding that the respondents had established a credible challenge to the validity of the suit patent under Section 64(1)(a<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a> (Anticipation by prior claiming). However, the Court agreed that the respondents had successfully raised a credible challenge under Sections 64(1)(e<\/span>)<\/a> (Anticipation by prior publication) and Section 64(1)(f) (Obviousness)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that Semaglutide was obvious to a person skilled in the art in light of the complete specifications and teachings contained in Patent IN 275964. While the Single Judge had also reached this conclusion, the Court differed only on the legal classification of the challenge. According to the Court, although a credible challenge to the validity of the suit patent had been established, it properly fell under Section 64(1)(e<\/span>)<\/a> and (f), Patents Act<\/a> rather than Section 64(1)(a<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court further held that since a credible challenge under any clause of Section 64(1) was sufficient to constitute a valid defence under Section 107(1)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a> in a patent infringement action, the respondents had successfully established such a defence. Consequently, the Court concurred with the ultimate decision of the Single Judge and found that no ground for interference was made out.<\/p>\n

The Court held that the Single Judge had slightly erred by conflating the concepts of obviousness under Section 64(1)(f<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a>, and anticipation by prior claiming under Section 64(1)(a<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a>. According to the Court, the reasoning adopted by the Single Judge to hold that a prima facie case existed under Section 64(1)(a<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a> actually supported a credible challenge to the validity of the suit patent under Section 64(1)(f<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court examined the relevant portions of the impugned judgment and noted that the defendants had argued that the Semaglutide compound claimed in the suit patent lacked novelty because the same compound had already been disclosed in the genus Patent. They had contended that, based on the principle laid down in Novartis AG<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span>, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 106<\/a>, the plaintiff could not claim the same subject matter again in a subsequent patent. The defendants had also argued that the teachings in the genus Patent sufficiently enabled the Semaglutide compound and relied on the plaintiff’s own statements before foreign patent offices and the Indian Patent Office indicating that Semaglutide was the only commercial product derived from both patents.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the reasoning relied upon by the Single Judge, particularly references to the teachings of the earlier patent and the understanding of a “person skilled in the art”, related more closely to obviousness under Section 64(1)(f<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a> rather than anticipation by prior claiming under Section 64(1)(a<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a>. The Court emphasised that Section 64(1)(a<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a> requires a clear congruence of claims, whereas the perspective of a “person skilled in the art” is primarily relevant for determining obviousness under Section 64(1)(f<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a>, and only to a limited extent under Section 64(1)(e<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, the Court noted that the analysis undertaken by the Single Judge effectively demonstrated a prima facie case of obviousness. In particular, the Court observed that some of the features identified by the appellant as novel and inventive in the Semaglutide compound had already been claimed in Claim 21 of the genus patent.<\/p>\n

The Court further noted that five inventors were common to both the genus patent and the suit patent. In such circumstances, the Court relied on the test laid down in AstraZeneca AB<\/span> v. Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd.<\/span>, 2021 SCC OnLine Del 3746<\/a>, which held that obviousness should be assessed from the perspective of a “person in the know” rather than merely a “person skilled in the art.”<\/p>\n

Applying the “person in the know” standard, the Court held that Semaglutide would prima facie appear obvious from the teachings of the genus patent. Accordingly, the Court concluded that the respondents had established a credible challenge to the validity of the suit patent under Section 64(1)(f<\/span>)<\/a>, Patents Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Since this ground alone was sufficient to uphold the impugned judgment, the Court held that it was unnecessary to examine any other aspects of the case.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the Court upheld the impugned judgment and dismissed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

[Novo Nordisk<\/span> v. Dr Reddys Laboratories Ltd.<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 898<\/a>, decided on 9-3-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n

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

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

For the Petitioner:<\/span> Hemant Singh, Mamta Jha, Rishabh Paliwal, Shreyansh Gupta, Sanchit Sharma, Advocates<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> Gopal Subramanium, J. Sai Deepak, Senior Advocates, Mohit Goel, Sidhant Goel, Aditya Goel, Deepankar Mishra, Kartikeya Tandon, Pavan Bhushan, Avinash Sharma, Raghav Kohli, Adnan Yousuf, Ankit Malhotra, Advocates<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“Viewed from the perspective of a person in the know, it is prima facie clear that Semaglutide would be obvious from the teachings contained in the Genius Patent and that, therefore, a credible challenge to the validity of the suit patent, under Section 64(1)(f), is made out.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67539,"featured_media":378349,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2543,100430,68986,88462,100431,100432,49927,100433,100435,100434,100429],"class_list":["post-378149","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-dr-reddys-laboratories","tag-justice-c-hari-shankar","tag-justice-om-prakash-shukla","tag-novo-nordisk","tag-obviousness","tag-patents-act-1970","tag-prior-art-through-publication","tag-section-641e-patents-act","tag-section-641f-patents-act","tag-semaglutide-patent-infringement"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi HC allows Dr. Reddy's to make and import Semaglutide | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk's injunction plea; finds credible validity challenge to Semaglutide patent and allows Dr. Reddy's to manufacture and import the drug.\" \/>\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\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi HC upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk\u2019s injunction plea; Allows Dr. Reddy\u2019s to manufacture and import \u2018Semaglutide\u2019\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk's injunction plea; finds credible validity challenge to Semaglutide patent and allows Dr. Reddy's to manufacture and import the drug.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-03-12T06:30:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-03-13T12:14:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-25-24-1.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=\"Prarthana Gupta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Delhi HC upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk\u2019s injunction plea; Allows Dr. Reddy\u2019s to manufacture and import \u2018Semaglutide\u2019\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prarthana Gupta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 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\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi HC allows Dr. Reddy's to make and import Semaglutide | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-25-24-1.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-03-12T06:30:20+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-13T12:14:24+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk's injunction plea; finds credible validity challenge to Semaglutide patent and allows Dr. Reddy's to manufacture and import the drug.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-25-24-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-25-24-1.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Semaglutide patent infringement\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi HC upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk\u2019s injunction plea; Allows Dr. Reddy\u2019s to manufacture and import \u2018Semaglutide\u2019\"}]},{\"@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\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382\",\"name\":\"Prarthana Gupta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Prarthana Gupta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/prarthana\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi HC allows Dr. Reddy's to make and import Semaglutide | SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk's injunction plea; finds credible validity challenge to Semaglutide patent and allows Dr. Reddy's to manufacture and import the drug.","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\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi HC upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk\u2019s injunction plea; Allows Dr. Reddy\u2019s to manufacture and import \u2018Semaglutide\u2019","og_description":"Delhi High Court upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk's injunction plea; finds credible validity challenge to Semaglutide patent and allows Dr. Reddy's to manufacture and import the drug.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-03-12T06:30:20+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-03-13T12:14:24+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-25-24-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prarthana Gupta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Delhi HC upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk\u2019s injunction plea; Allows Dr. Reddy\u2019s to manufacture and import \u2018Semaglutide\u2019","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prarthana Gupta","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/","name":"Delhi HC allows Dr. Reddy's to make and import Semaglutide | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-25-24-1.webp","datePublished":"2026-03-12T06:30:20+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-13T12:14:24+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382"},"description":"Delhi High Court upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk's injunction plea; finds credible validity challenge to Semaglutide patent and allows Dr. Reddy's to manufacture and import the drug.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-25-24-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-25-24-1.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Semaglutide patent infringement"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/12\/delhi-hc-allows-dr-reddys-to-make-and-import-semaglutide\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi HC upholds rejection of Novo Nordisk\u2019s injunction plea; Allows Dr. Reddy\u2019s to manufacture and import \u2018Semaglutide\u2019"}]},{"@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\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382","name":"Prarthana Gupta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Prarthana Gupta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/prarthana\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/blog-25-24-1.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":299063,"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\/","url_meta":{"origin":378149,"position":0},"title":"Revocation Petition under Section 64 of Patents Act is not a suit within the meaning of Section 10 of CPC: Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"August 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe 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.\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":310810,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/05\/dhc-restrains-dr-reddys-from-commercially-launching-any-product-consisting-of-olaparib-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":378149,"position":1},"title":"Delhi HC restrains Dr. Reddy\u2019s Laboratories Ltd. from commercially launching any product consisting of \u2018Olaparib\u2019 till 12-03-2024","author":"Simranjeet","date":"January 5, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cDr. Reddy\u2019s is willing to give an undertaking that it will not commercially launch product \u2018Olaparib\u2019 prior to expiry of Kudos Pharmaceuticals\u2019 patent and until then, it will only undertake activities which are permissible u\/s 107-A of Patents Act, 1970.\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":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":378149,"position":2},"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":380223,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/06\/ipr-march-2026-roundup-key-high-court-judgments-on-domain-name-copyright-trade-mark-patents-and-more\/","url_meta":{"origin":378149,"position":3},"title":"IPR March 2026 Roundup: Key High Court Judgments on Domain Name, Copyright, Trade Mark, Patents and More","author":"Prarthana Gupta","date":"April 6, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick legal roundup to cover important stories of March 2026 on Intellectual Property Rights from all High Courts; covering key updates on Domain name fraud, Trade mark and Copyright infringement.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"IPR March 2026","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/IPR-March-2026.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/IPR-March-2026.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/IPR-March-2026.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/IPR-March-2026.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":270049,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/14\/delhi-high-court-non-consideration-of-the-grounds-raised-in-a-pre-grant-opposition-while-granting-patent-per-se-constitutes-violation-of-principles-of-natural-justice\/","url_meta":{"origin":378149,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court| Non-consideration of the grounds raised in a pre-grant opposition while granting patent per se constitutes violation of principles of natural justice","author":"Editor","date":"July 14, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Jyoti Singh, J. in a case where patent was granted without delving and dealing with the grounds raised in the pre-grant opposition stage remanded it back to the Deputy Controller of Patent for reconsideration of the pre-grant opposition as the impugned order violates principles of natural justice.\u2026","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\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":281943,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/19\/delhi-high-court-rules-principles-of-natural-justice-to-be-followed-by-indian-patent-office-in-pre-grant-opposition-stage-novartis-natco-hearing-both-sides-necessary-legalnews-legalresearch-legalupdat\/","url_meta":{"origin":378149,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court rules in the context of the procedure and principles of natural justice to be observed by the Indian Patent Office in a pre-grant opposition to a patent application","author":"Editor","date":"January 19, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"In pharmaceutical patents, especially, additional care must be taken to ensure that, by being allowed to evergreen a patent beyond its expiry, the patent holder does not keep others, who may seek to deal in the patented product, out of the market. The ultimate sufferer, in such a situation, would\u2026","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\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/378149","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\/67539"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=378149"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/378149\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/378349"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=378149"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=378149"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=378149"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}