Nuziveedu Seeds Limited v. Corteva Agriscience Llc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18.03.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY in (T)OP(PT) No. 65 OF 2023 Nuziveedu Seeds Limited Through its Authorised Representative Mr.Pawan Choudhary, Survey No.69, Kandlakoya, Medchal Mandal, Gundlaponchampally Municipality, Medchal Malkajgiri District, Telangana 500 100.
..Applicant (Amended as per order dated 19.02.2026 in (PT) A No.1 of 2026 in (T)OP(PT) No.65 of 2023) Vs
1. Corteva Agriscience Llc 9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268-1054, United States of America Address for Service in India De Penning and De Penning, Intellectual Property House, 31, South Bank Road, Chennai - 600 028, Tamil Nadu.
(Amended as per order dated 15.03.2024 in (PT) A No.1 of 2024 in (T)OP(PT) No.65 of 2023)
2. The Controller Of Patents The Patent Office, IPR Building, GST Road, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032 ..Respondent(s)
Application filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Madras High Court Original Side Rules read with Order XVIII Rule 17 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 157 of BSA, 2023 to permit the applicant to recall the witness, PW-1 Mr. Pawan Chowdhary for examination and marking of the documents.
For Applicant:
Mr.Nishant Rai & Ms.Akhya Anand for M/S. LEX ORBIS For Respondents:
Mr.K.Prem Chandar & Mr.N.C.Vishal for M/s.Pravin Anand for R1 Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi, Central Govt. Standing Counsel for R2
ORDER
The applicant/petitioner had filed an application [(PT)A No.2 of 2026] for permission to file three documents. Such application was allowed by order dated 04.03.2026. As a consequence, the present application has been filed to recall P.W.1 for purposes of marking said documents and enabling the cross-examination of P.W.1 in relation thereto, if deemed necessary by the counter party.
2. Learned counsel for the first respondent opposes this application on the ground that this application could have been filed along with the earlier application for permission to file additional documents. He also points out that the earlier application was filed in October, 2025.
3. For reasons set out while allowing the earlier application, I am satisfied that reasonable cause is shown for allowing this application. The contention of learned counsel for the first respondent that the application could have been filed along with the earlier application is, however, correct.
4. The applicant shall bear the expenses relating to the next session at Arbitration Centre for recording of evidence. Subject to this condition, this application is allowed as prayed for.
5. Parties are directed to submit revised common schedule for recording further evidence.
6. List (T)OP(PT) No. 65 of 2023 on 15.04.2026. 18.03.2026 mmi To The Controller Of Patents The Patent Office, IPR Building, GST Road, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
mmi IN (T)OP(PT) No. 65 of 2023 18.03.2026