Important Patent Case law – 2021

In this post, we bring to you Important Patent Cases decided by Indian Courts in year 2021

FMC Corporation & ANR. vs Natco Pharma Limited

In this comprehensive judgment with respect to grant of interim injunctions involving a patent relating to “Chlorantraniliprole” (also known as CTPR), the Delhi High Court rejected a valiant effort by the defendant based on several grounds under the patent law. The Court refused to grant permission to the defendant to manufacture and sell the insecticide during the pendency of the suit. While coming to its conclusion, the Court pointed out that the defendant failed to make a credible challenge with respect to vulnerability of patent validity.

The Court stated that the Supreme Court’s judgment in Novartis does not state that disclosure is equal to claim coverage, but simply points out that there cannot be a large gap between the two. The Court also observed that disclosure of a compound in a markush claim does not necessarily make the species patent susceptible to anticipation, prior claiming, obviousness or Section 3d challenge. It then went on to cite some principles pertaining to analyzing patentability of selection patents by equating selection patents to species patents in this case. The judgment is a good read, especially the arguments of the defendant’s attorney, Mr. Sai Deepak.

Citation: FMC Corporation & Anr. vs Natco Pharma Limited, Decided by the Delhi High Court on 7 July, 2021, available at:, visited on 9th July, 2021.

Novartis Ag & Anr. vs Natco Pharma Limited & Anr.

This case relates to a patent covering Eltrombopag Olamine (Eltrombopagbis(monoethanolamine)) held by Novartis. The drug is used for treatment of thrombocytopenia sold under the brand name “REVOLADE.” Novartis filed a patent infringement suit against the Defendant, NATCO, which was planning to launch the same product. In response NATCO claimed patent invalidity based on prior claiming, obviousness, Section 3d, industrial applicability and Section 8 non-compliance.

After hearing the parties, the Court held that the claims of invalidity of NATCO do not hold water, and restrained NATCO from launching the product during the pendency of the suit. This case outlines some important patent principles, and is a highly recommended read for a crisp understanding of prior claiming, non-obviousness, Section 3d, and genus/species patent interplay from the context of coverage and disclosure.

Case Citation: Novartis Ag & Anr. vs Natco Pharma Limited & Anr., Decided by Delhi High Court on 13 December, 2021, available at:, visited on 19th December, 2021.

Sulphur Mills Limited vs Dharmaj Crop Guard Limited & Anr.

In this case involving a patent with respect to an agricultural fertilizer composition, the Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favour of the patent holder. In a comprehensive and well written judgment, Justice Pratibha Singh rejected the defendant’s plea of prima facie patent invalidity based on a preexisting patent of the patent holder. Justice Singh came to the prima facie conclusion that the patented invention was novel and inventive because it used higher percentage of sulphur and smaller particulate size compared to the prior patent of the patent holder. She pointed out that there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation in the prior patent to arrive at the patented invention. She referred to the standard of the person in the know put forth by the Delhi High Court in a recent case, and stated that the invention would be non-obvious despite the said standard. As the defendant failed to make out a prima facie case of invalidity, the Court granted an interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff.

Citation: Sulphur Mills Limited vs Dharmaj Crop Guard Limited & Anr., Decided by the Delhi High Court on 2nd  August, 2021, available at: Sulphur Mills Limited vs Dharmaj Crop Guard Limited & Anr. , visited on 4th August, 2021.

This post is brought to you by BananaIP’s Consulting & Strategy Department.

About BananaIP’s Consulting & Strategy Department

BananaIP’s Consulting & Strategy Department has the experience of helping companies use IP for business and competitive advantage. Companies regularly seek their assistance, advise and opinions on identifying/mining inventions and creations, conducting IP audits, protecting IP assets appropriately, launching risk free products, managing litigation for business benefit, resolving disputes out of Court, making money out of IP, enforcing IP, and licensing transactions. If you have any questions, or need any clarifications, please write to [email protected].


Please note that these case updates have been put together from different sources, primary and secondary, and BananaIP’s reporters may not have verified all the decisions published in the bulletin. You may write to [email protected]  for corrections and take down.

Leave a comment