TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1298X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... patent, before the Assistant Controller of Patent and Design (in short, the Controller ), who vide his order dated 24th September, 2012 revoked the patent which gave rise to this litigation. Heard Mr. Harish Salve, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. T.R. Andhyarujina, learned senior counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 at length. Detailed arguments were addressed with regard to the correctness or otherwise of the order passed by the Controller as well as by the High Court and the consequences thereof. We find it unnecessary to examine all those contentions since we are sending this matter back to the Controller for fresh consideration in accordance with law. The main controversy raised in the case is o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Opposition Board and its proceeding- (1) On receipt of notice of opposition under rule 55A, the Controller shall, by order, constitute an Opposition Board consisting of three members and nominate one of the members as the Chairman of the Board. (2) An examiner appointed under sub-section (2) of section 73 shall be eligible to be a member of the Opposition Board. (3) The examiner, who has dealt with the application for patent during the proceeding for grant of patent thereon shall not be eligible as member of Opposition Board as specified in sub-rule (2) for that application. (4) The Opposition Board shall conduct the examination of the notice of opposition along with documents filed under rule 57 to 60 referred to under sub-se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a date and time for the hearing of the opposition and shall give the parties not less than ten days' notice of such hearing and may require members of Opposition Board to be present in the hearing. (2) If either party to the proceeding desires to be heard, he shall inform the Controller by a notice along with the fee as specified in the First Schedule. (3) The Controller may refuse to hear any party who has not given notice under sub-rule (2). (4) If either party intends to rely on any publication at the hearing not already mentioned in the notice, statement or evidence, he shall give to the other party and to the Controller not less than five days' notice of his intention, together with details of such publication. (5) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion has novelty, inventive steps etc. Such recommendations are made after examining the evidence adduced by the parties before it. Unless the parties are informed of the reasons, for making such recommendations they would not be able to effectively advance their respective contentions before the Controller. Section 25(3)(b) read with Rule 56(4) cast no obligation on the Opposition Board to give a copy of the Report to either of the parties. So also no obligation is cast under Section 25(4) or under Rule 62 on the Controller to make available the report of the recommendation of the Opposition Board. But considering the fact that the Report of the Opposition Board can be crucial in the decision making process, while passing order by the Cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
