Patent appeal disposed of as infructuous after the patent term expired in August 2024. The court expressly left open the question of law on the interpretation of Section 3(j) of the Patents Act, 1970.
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.
$~1
MAHARASHTRA HYBRID SEEDS COMPANY LIMITED
.....Appellant
Through: Ms. Vindhya S. Mavi, Ms. Harshita Agarwal and Ms. Surbhi Nautiyal, Advocates.
versus
ASSISTANT CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS, DESIGNS AND TRADEMARK AND GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Subhash Tanwar, CGSC with Mr. Sandeep Mishra, Mr. Naveen and Mr. Bhavi Garg, Advocates.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
O R D E R
% 22.10.2024
AMIT BANSAL, J
OCTOBER 22, 2024 kd
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 02:40:53
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the interpretation of Section 3(j) of the Patents Act, 1970 applied to the appellant's patent — left open.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company Limited
Assistant Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademark and Geographical Indications
Amit Bansal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
