← Library
Madras High CourtWP/32028/2012disposed of

F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ag, 124 v. Sankalp Rehabilitation

2017-08-31Honourable Mr Justice P.D.Audikesavalu,Honourable Mr Justice M. Venugopal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 31.8.2017 Coram The Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.VENUGOPAL and The Hon'ble Mr.Justice P.D.AUDIKESAVALU W.P.No.32028 of 2012 F.HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE AG 124 GRENZACHERSTRASSE CH-4070 BASLE SWITZERLAND REP. BY ITS CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY MS.SUJATHA SUBRAMANIAM 134 FF SIKHDEV VIHAR NEW DELHI ...

Petitioner Vs 1 SANKALP REHABILITATION TRUST 115B BELLE VUE DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD MUMBAI 400 050 2 THE ASST. CONSTROLLER OF PATENTS & DESINGS IPR BUILDING GST ROAD GUINDY CHENNAI-32 3 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY APPELLATE BOARD GUNA COMPLEX ANNEXE I 2ND FLOOR 443 ANNA SALAI TEYNAMPET CHENNAI-18 ...

respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to original Appeal No. OA/ 8/2009/PT/CH before the respondent No.3 and quashing the order numbered 250/2012 dated 2.11.2012 passed by the respondent NO.3 therein. For Petitioner : Mr.P.S.Raman, Senior Counsel, for Mr.R.Parthasarathy For respondents : Mr.Anand Grover, Senior Counsel, for M/s.Anna Mathew Ms.Driyam Lizmary Cherian, for R-1 http://www.judis.nic.in Mr.J.Madhanagopal Rao, for R-2 and R-3

M.VENUGOPAL, J.

and P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.

(tar)

O R D E R

Today, the matter is listed for hearing the Learned Senior Counsel for the First Respondent. At that time, it is represented on behalf of the petitioner as well as the First Respondent that the patent period has come to an end on 15.5.2017. Therefore, this court is not delving deep into the merits of the impugned order dated 2.11.2012 passed by the Third Respondent/Intellectual Property Appellate Board. Further, this Court is not expressing any opinion on the correctness or otherwise of the finding pertaining to the term "person interested" under Section 2(1)(t) of the Patents Act, 1970, rendered by the Third Respondent/Intellectual Property Appellate Board. Added further, the issue regarding the term "person interested" is left open.

2. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently M.P.No.1 of 2012 and WMP No.20765 of 2016 are closed. (M.V., J.) (P.D.A., J.) 31.08.2017 Index: yes Internet :yes tar To 1 THE ASST. CONSTROLLER OF PATENTS & DESINGS IPR BUILDING GST ROAD GUINDY CHENNAI-32 http://www.judis.nic.in 3 THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY APPELLATE BOARD GUNA COMPLEX ANNEXE I 2ND FLOOR 443 ANNA SALAI TEYNAMPET CHENNAI-18 W.P.No.32028 of 2012