The High Court dismissed an intellectual property appeal (IPDPTA/30/2022) for non-prosecution after repeated adjournment requests by the appellant due to an inability to file the Vakalatnama.
The appeal IPDPTA/30/2022 stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
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-20
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE
IPDPTA/30/2022
ASTRAZENECA AB (SR/39/2019/PT/KOL) VS
THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR Date : 12th May, 2023
The Court:- The matter has been repeatedly adjourned on the ground of the appellant. The matter was adjourned on 20th December, 2022, 6th February, 2023 and 3rd April, 2023 when the appellant had sought for time to file the Vakalatnama.
The Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant had been unable to file the Vakalatnama and seeks an adjournment.
It is obvious that the appellant is seriously unable to proceed in this matter.
In view of the aforesaid, IPDPTA/30/2022 stands dismissed for nonprosecution.
(RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR, J.)
D.Ghosh
AstraZeneca AB
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