Indian Patent Law | Intellepedia

Wanted Dead or Alive: Delhi High Court Holds Patent Revocation Survives Expiry and Section 107 Defence

Hand wearing a blue glove holding a small vial beside torn paper with the words “How to Survive,” symbolizing the Patent revocation case as decided by the Delhi High Court between Boehringer Ingelheim v. Controller

In the case of Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG v. Controller of Patents & Anr., the Delhi High Court addressed two important questions under the Patents Act: whether a revocation petition survives patent expiry, and whether it can continue after a Section 107 invalidity defence is raised in an infringement suit. The dispute arose from parallel revocation and infringement proceedings relating to Patent IN 243301 covering Linagliptin. The court held that revocation under Section 64 remains maintainable despite patent expiry and is not barred by a Section 107 defence.

Intellepedia’s Top Patent Articles of 2025: A Year in Review

A concise roundup of Intellepedia’s most impactful patent law articles of 2025, highlighting key judicial and Patent Office developments every IP practitioner should note.

Patent Expired. Damages Pending. Game Still On for Philips.

A futuristic courtroom setting with a lone judge seated at the bench, surrounded by abstract digital circuitry and tech schematics. A glowing red waveform symbolizing signal modulation runs horizontally across the scene. In the top right corner, a prominent “DAMAGES PENDING” stamp reinforces the theme of unresolved legal claims related to expired technology.

Philips’ damages decree remains enforceable despite patent expiry, underscoring post-expiry enforcement rights under Indian IP law.

Inventive Step Misjudged? Delhi HC Revives Trident’s Patent Application

Composite image showing a close-up of breathable maroon fabric, a cartoon panel of judges giving thumbs up, and colorful yarn balls representing air-rich yarn innovation in a legal patent context

Delhi HC revives Trident’s patent application, citing flaws in the inventive step analysis of its air-rich yarn invention.

Delhi High Court Grants Patent Application Restoration After Agent’s Error

Illustration of a courtroom with wooden benches and judge's bench; inset shows a cartoon man scratching his head with a lightbulb over it, symbolizing a sudden realization or mistake.

Delhi High Court restores Synertec’s patent application, ruling that agent error, not intent, caused the missed Form-18 deadline.

Can Claims Presumptively Inherit the Priority Date of a Provisional Application?

Close-up of a person circling a date on a calendar, symbolizing checking timelines

In Rallis India Limited v. Deputy Controller of Patents and Others, the Madras High Court refused to assume that claims automatically inherit the priority date of a provisional, especially where the crucial EC formulation emerges only in the complete specification. The decision pushes the Patent Office to treat priority and prior art questions as matters for analysis, not default settings.

Section 3(i) Rejection Set Aside: Court Clarifies Scope of Pharmaceutical Patent Claims

Banner image showing a human brain against a blue molecular/network background, with overlaid text: “Section 3(i) Rejection Set Aside: Court Clarifies Scope of Pharmaceutical Patent Claims”.

The Delhi High Court reiterated that a properly drafted pharmaceutical composition claim cannot be dismissed as a “method of treatment” under Section 3(i), and has sent Medilabo’s neurodegenerative drug application back for a full, merits-based examination.

Comments and Suggestions on Patent Agent Code of Conduct and Patent Rules Draft

DPIIT’s publication of the draft rules and draft Code of Conduct has provided an opportunity for stakeholders to share their views on the future regulatory framework for patent agents. Patent agents at BananaIP Counsels have responded with detailed comments at general and specific levels, offering suggestions that aim to make the framework more practical and suitable for modern patent practice. Their submission seeks to contribute to a balanced ecosystem that enables the continued growth of innovation in India.

Madras High Court Overturns Patent Refusal for Ab Initio’s Data Lineage Invention

Illustration of judges giving thumbs up, overlaid on a futuristic data center with digital graphics representing data flow and technology

Madras High Court patent judgment backs Ab Initio’s data lineage invention, affirming novelty and inventive step in software patents.

Patent Refusal Cannot Be a Single Line: Calcutta High Court Calls for Reasoned Orders

Yellow road marking with bold black text reading “SINGLE LINE. DO NOT CROSS,” symbolizing the lack of reasoning in the Stromag GmbH patent refusal—a single-line decision that violated principles of natural justice.

In the case of Stromag GmbH vs. Controller General of Patents, the Calcutta High Court ruled that patent refusal orders must contain detailed reasoning. A single-line dismissal, the court said, does not meet the legal standards of a quasi-judicial function and is unsustainable.