The High Court at Calcutta dismissed an appeal (IPDPTA/4/2023) for nonprosecution as the appellant failed to produce a Vakalatnama despite repeated adjournments and expressed lack of seriousness.
The IPDPTA/4/2023 appeal stands dismissed for nonprosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
OC-27
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE
IPDPTA/4/2023
PHARMA MAR S A (OA/16/2017/PT/KOL)
VS
THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR Date : 12th May, 2023
Appearance:
Mr. Swatarup Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Sukanta Ghosh, Adv.
The Court:- The respondent authority is represented.
The matter has been repeatedly adjourned on the ground of the appellant.
The Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has not yet been able to file the Vakalatnama. The matter was adjourned on repeated occasions when the appellant had sought for time to file the Vakalatnama. It is obvious that the appellant is not serious in proceeding with this appeal.
In view of the aforesaid, IPDPTA/4/2023 stands dismissed for nonprosecution.
(RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR, J.)
D.Ghosh
Pharma Mar S A
The Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs
Ravi Krishan Kapur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court