Summary
Elgi Ultra Private Limited, manufacturer of a patented pressure regulator cum whistle counter for pressure cookers, took Harish Joshi to the Madras High Court after he repeatedly claimed the pressure cooker patent as his own innovation on social media. Joshi, whose own earlier patent application had been abandoned and cited as prior art against Elgi Ultra's grant, never challenged the patent through revocation or opposition, choosing instead to make disparaging public comments. Proceeding ex parte after Joshi failed to appear, the Madras High Court examined whether unsubstantiated claims of authorship over a granted patent justified injunctive relief even without proof of monetary loss. The court restrained Joshi from further derogatory statements and awarded costs, while declining the damages claimed for lack of evidence. The ruling underscores that patent holders can seek reputational protection through injunctions independent of any validity challenge to the grant itself.
Background
When a company’s patented invention becomes the subject of public ridicule on social media, the question that arises is whether its pressure cooker patent is protected only by the remedies patent law provides, or whether courts must step in separately to guard commercial reputation.
Elgi Ultra Private Limited (“Elgi Ultra”), a Coimbatore based manufacturer of pressure cookers, obtained Patent No. 452787 on 19 September 2023 for an invention titled “A Pressure Regulator cum Whistle Counter for a Pressure Cooker and a Pressure Cooker with Regulator cum Whistle Counter”, from an application filed on 11 May 2017. Harish Joshi (“Joshi”), the defendant, had earlier filed his own patent application for a similar device, but that application was abandoned and was cited as prior art during examination of Elgi Ultra’s application. Rather than pursuing any statutory remedy against the resulting grant, Joshi posted comments on Elgi Ultra’s Facebook page, including a comment dated 21 January 2025, asserting that the patented product was his own innovation and idea. Elgi Ultra issued a cease and desist notice on 31 January 2025, to which Joshi’s email response did not resolve the dispute. Elgi Ultra then instituted a suit before the Commercial Division of the Madras High Court, registered as C.S(COMM DIV) No. 173 of 2025 along with O.A. No. 692 of 2025, seeking a permanent injunction restraining Joshi from making derogatory or defamatory statements about its patent, together with damages of Rs. 10,00,000 and costs. Summons was served on Joshi, he failed to enter appearance, and he was set ex parte on 8 December 2025. Elgi Ultra proceeded to lead ex parte evidence, examining one witness and exhibiting fifteen documents establishing the grant, its commercial exploitation, and the defendant’s comments.
Issues
-
- Whether Harish Joshi’s Facebook comments claiming the patented invention as his own innovation amounted to derogatory or defamatory statements warranting a permanent injunction.
- Whether the availability of post-grant opposition or revocation remedies under the Patents Act, 1970 (“Patents Act”) precluded Elgi Ultra from separately seeking injunctive relief against public statements disparaging its patent grant.
- Whether Elgi Ultra was entitled to monetary damages for the alleged reputational harm in the absence of evidence of consequential loss.
- Whether Elgi Ultra was entitled to costs as the partly successful party.
Elgi Ultra’s Arguments
-
- Relied on the letter of authorization and the certificate of patent grant for Patent No. 452787, dated 19 September 2023 on Application No. 201741016524 filed 11 May 2017, to establish valid ownership of the pressure regulator cum whistle counter invention.
- Placed on record the First Examination Report dated 31 December 2020, in which Joshi’s own patent application was cited as prior art and noted to have been abandoned, to show that Joshi held no subsisting rights over the invention.
- Produced chartered accountant certificates evidencing promotional expenditure and sales turnover on the patented product, to demonstrate that Joshi’s Facebook comments calling the invention “his innovation and patent idea” threatened commercial reputation and goodwill.
- Exhibited screenshots of Joshi’s comments on Elgi Ultra’s promotional Facebook post dated 21 January 2025, along with the cease and desist notice dated 31 January 2025 and Joshi’s email response, to establish continuing disparagement despite notice.
- Sought a permanent injunction, Rs. 10,00,000 in damages for reputational harm, and costs of the suit.
Harish Joshi’s Position
-
- Did not enter appearance or file a written statement, and was proceeded against ex parte after service of summons.
- His email response to the cease and desist notice, placed on record by Elgi Ultra, did not withdraw or retract the claim that the invention was his own idea.
- Never availed of the statutory options of filing a post-grant opposition or a revocation petition against Patent No. 452787, although these remedies were available to any interested person.
Court’s Analysis
A Patent Grant Cannot Be Disparaged Without Recourse to Law
The court noted that Elgi Ultra had established, through the patent grant certificate and the extracts from the patent registry, that a valid patent subsisted for the pressure cooker patent invention titled “A Pressure Regulator cum Whistle Counter for a Pressure Cooker and a Pressure Cooker with Regulator cum Whistle Counter”. The court observed that any person aggrieved by the grant of a patent has the statutory right, under the Patents Act, to challenge it through a post-grant opposition or a revocation petition. The court found that Harish Joshi, despite having his own earlier patent application cited as prior art and abandoned in the course of prosecution of Elgi Ultra’s application, did not exercise either of these remedies at any point before or after the grant. Instead, the court observed that Joshi chose to post comments on Elgi Ultra’s Facebook page asserting that the pressure cooker patent product was his own innovation and idea, without initiating any formal challenge to the grant itself.
Commercial Reputation as the Basis for Injunctive Relief
The court held that the chartered accountant certificates evidencing promotional expenditure and sales turnover, read together with the exhibited screenshots of Joshi’s comments, established that Elgi Ultra had built a genuine commercial stake in the patented product and that unrebutted public claims of authorship over that product were capable of affecting its market reputation. The court reasoned that since Joshi was set ex parte and led no evidence to counter the plaintiff’s case, the plaintiff’s version, supported by exhibited documents, stood unchallenged. The court further observed that the absence of any evidence of consequential monetary loss or demonstrated loss of reputation meant that the claim for Rs. 10,00,000 in damages could not be sustained, even though injunctive relief was warranted. The court opined that the appropriate response to unsubstantiated derogatory statements about a patent grant was to restrain the making of such statements, while leaving open the defendant’s right to pursue revocation should he wish to do so, rather than to convert the proceeding into a determination on damages absent proof of loss.
Costs Follow Partial Success
The court stated that since Elgi Ultra succeeded in securing the injunction but not the damages claimed, it was entitled to costs as the partly successful party, and directed Joshi to pay an aggregate sum of Rs. 2,00,000 towards court fees, lawyer’s fees and other expenses.
Findings
In view of the observations and the arguments presented by both the parties, the Madras High Court held that:
-
- Harish Joshi is permanently restrained from posting, making, or spreading any statements, oral or otherwise, that are derogatory or defamatory to Elgi Ultra or its pressure cooker patent, including the comment dated 21 January 2025.
- Elgi Ultra’s claim for Rs. 10,00,000 in damages is rejected in the absence of evidence establishing consequential monetary loss or reputational harm.
- Elgi Ultra, as the partly successful party, is entitled to costs, and Harish Joshi is directed to pay Rs. 2,00,000 towards court fees, lawyer’s fees and other expenses.
- The injunction does not preclude Harish Joshi from pursuing a revocation petition against Patent No. 452787 should he choose to do so.
- Application O.A. No. 692 of 2025 stands closed.
Case Citation: Elgi Ultra Private Limited vs. Harish Joshi, C.S(COMM DIV) No. 173 of 2025 & O.A. No. 692 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Madras, decided on 18 March 2026. Available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/108903338
Authored by Gaurav Mishra, Patent Attorney, BananaIP Counsels