Allowed¶22

Venusai Chodisetti v. The Controller of Patents

Madras HC8 Apr 2026CMP/7113/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court (Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.), CMP No. 7113 of 2026 in CMA(PT)/SR.No.38370 of 2026, order dated 08-04-2026 — condonation of 428 days' delay in filing appeal against the Controller of Patents' refusal of patent Application No. 202241030177; prolonged illness evidenced by medical records accepted as sufficient cause; appeal directed to be numbered if otherwise in order.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 428 days in filing the appeal condoned; Registry directed to number the appeal, if otherwise in order, and to print the name of Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi, learned CGSC, for the respondent. ¶22

Venusai Chodisetti Vs The Controller of Patents — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CMP No. 7113 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 08-04-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶6

CMP No. 7113 of 2026 in CMA(PT)/SR.No.38370 of 2026

¶7

Venusai Chodisetti 4b, Sreenivas Nilaya, 4th Cross, BOB Colony, Puttenahalli, J P Nagar, Bangalore South, Karnataka 560078.

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

The Controller of Patents The Patent Office, Intellectual Property Office, G.S.T.Road, Guindy, Chennai 32.

¶11

..Respondent(s)

¶12

PRAYER : To condone the delay of 428 days in filing this appeal against the order dated 30.9.2024 passed by the Learned Controller of patents, Chennai in matter of patent Application No. 202241030177 and thus render justice.

¶13

For Appellant(s): Mr.G.Ramesh For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi, CGSC

¶14

Page1 of 2

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

CMP No. 7113 of 2026

¶17

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

¶18

RNA

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The intending appellant has applied to condone the delay in filing the appeal. In the affidavit in support of this application, it is stated that the appeal could not be lodged within time on account of the prolonged illness of the intending appellant. In support of this assertion medical records have been disclosed. These medical records reveal that the appellant was undergoing treatment in 2023-2024.

¶21

Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the application on the grounds that the reasons mentioned in the affidavit do not constitute sufficient cause.

¶22

Considering the explanation offered by the intending appellant, the documents filed in support thereof and the fact that the appeal relates to the refusal to grant patent to an individual applicant, I conclude that sufficient cause is shown. Therefore, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. As a consequence, the Registry is directed to number the appeal, if otherwise in order. The Registry is directed to print the name of Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi, learned CGSC, for the respondent.

¶23

08-04-2026

¶24

RNA

¶25

CMP No. 7113 of 2026 in CMA(PT)/SR.No.38370 of 2026

¶26

Page2 of 2

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis