Ferid Allani v. Union of India & Ors

The petitioner, a citizen of Tunisia, applied for a patent for "a method and device for accessing information sources and services on the web". The Patent Office initially rejected the application due to lack of novelty and patentability under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, claiming it was a computer program and lacked novelty. After the petitioner appealed, the High Court remanded the matter. The Patent Office again rejected the application, citing Section 3(k) and lack of novelty for some claims. The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) upheld this rejection, stating the invention lacked "technical effect" or "technical advancement". The High Court reviewed the IPAB's order, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between computer programs "as such" and those with a specific technical contribution. The court noted that various guidelines for Computer Related Inventions have been issued over the years. Considering the legal precedents and evolving guidelines, the High Court ordered a re-examination of the patent application. Result: Writ petition allowed; patent application to be re-examined by the Patent Office within two months.