Summary
The Himachal Pradesh High Court granted an interim injunction to SML Limited in a fertilizer patent infringement case. The Court found a strong prima facie case and unrebutted evidence of infringement. The defendants were restrained from dealing with the product ‘Aladdin’ until further orders.
Claims of Patent Infringement
- SML Limited is the patentee of Indian Patent No. 282092 titled “Agricultural Composition”, granted in 2017.
- The patented invention relates to a granular fertilizer containing sulphur, zinc oxide, and a surfactant, within defined particle sizes.
- The patented product was launched commercially in 2018 under the brand name ‘TECHNO Z’.
- In 2023, SML discovered a competing product named ‘Aladdin’, being sold by the defendants, allegedly using the same composition.
- SML filed a commercial suit before the Himachal Pradesh High Court seeking:
-
- Permanent injunction,
- Damages of Rs. 1.02 crores,
- Destruction of infringing stock, and
- Removal of infringing content from commercial platforms.
-
- Alongside, SML also sought an interim injunction to restrain the defendants from continued infringement.
Prior Proceedings and Interim Order
- On July 24, 2023, the Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction, restraining the defendants from manufacturing or selling the infringing product.
- The defendants challenged the ex parte order through a Commercial Appeal, which was delayed by 408 days.
- The Division Bench disposed of the appeal on September 30, 2024, directing the Single Judge to decide the interim application within four weeks.
- The Court then heard arguments and reserved the matter for orders on April 25, 2025.
Issue Before the Court
- Whether the defendants’ product prima facie infringed the suit patent; and
- Whether SML Limited was entitled to an interim injunction pending the final decision in the suit.
Infringement and Invalidity Arguments
Arguments by SML Limited:
- SML asserted its exclusive rights under Section 48 of the Patents Act, 1970.
- It highlighted that the patent had survived pre- and post-grant oppositions.
- An expert affidavit showed that ‘Aladdin’ contained all features described in claims 11 and 12 of the suit patent.
- The composition, particle size, and other parameters matched the patented invention.
- Continued sale of the product caused irreparable harm and undermined its patent monopoly.
Arguments by the Defendants:
- The suit was based on a single trap purchase in a state outside their marketing territory, and the Court lacked territorial jurisdiction.
- The patent was invalid as it lacked novelty and inventive step.
- The composition mirrored government-notified fertilizer standards.
- The patent was an extension of earlier applications and was not a genuine technical advancement.
Court’s Take on Patent Infringement and Injunction
- The Court held that SML had made out a strong prima facie case of infringement.
- The expert affidavit was found credible and unrebutted.
- The Court noted that the patent had remained valid for over 14 years and had survived scrutiny through opposition.
- It emphasized that a granted and unrevoked patent carries a presumption of validity.
- The Court rejected the jurisdictional objection for the interim stage.
- It found that the balance of convenience lay with SML and that irreparable harm would result if the injunction was not granted.
Final Findings and Order
- The Court confirmed the interim injunction against the defendants.
- The defendants were restrained from manufacturing, selling, advertising, importing, or exporting the product ‘Aladdin’ or any product falling within the scope of claims 11 and 12 of the suit patent until further orders.
Citation: SML Limited v. Mohan & Company & Anr., OMP No. 320 of 2023 in COMS No. 6 of 2023, High Court of Himachal Pradesh (June 6, 2025) Available at Indian Kanoon (visited on June 20, 2025)
