TMPatentRemanded 27 November 2012
Cipla Ltd. v. Union of India and Others
CIVIL APPEAL NO(s).8479-8480 OF 2012 (arising out of SLP(C)No(s).34504-34505/2012 )
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Bench
- K.S. Radhakrishnan, Dipak Misra
- Outcome
- Remanded
- Date of judgment
- 27/11/2012
Statutory provisions
Section 25(2), Patents Act 1970 — Notice of opposition after grant but before expiry of one yearSection 25(3)(b), Patents Act 1970 — Constitution of Opposition BoardSection 25(4), Patents Act 1970 — Controller's decision after Opposition Board recommendation
Key issue
Whether the Controller's revocation of a patent, based on the Opposition Board's report, was valid when the report was not provided to the parties, thus violating principles of natural justice.
Summary
This dispute arose when Cipla Ltd. sought to revoke a patent granted to Sugen Inc. USA and Pharmacia and Upjohn Company USA. The Controller of Patents had revoked the patent without providing a copy of the Opposition Board's report to the parties, which forms the basis for the Controller's decision. The Supreme Court found that this omission violated the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the court set aside the revocation order and directed the Controller to reconsider the matter after giving both parties the Opposition Board's report and an opportunity to present their arguments.
Result: Patent revocation order set aside and matter remanded to Controller for fresh consideration in accordance with natural justice principles.
Tags
#patent revocation#opposition proceedings#natural justice#Opposition Board report#Controller of Patents
Judgment PDFOpen in new tab