Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Saurav Chaudhary vs Union Of India & Anr on 15 February, 2023

Author: Sanjeev Narula

Bench: Sanjeev Narula

                          $~24
                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +      W.P.(C)-IPD 9/2023
                                 SAURAV CHAUDHARY                                      ..... Petitioner
                                                    Through:     Ms. Meenakshi Ogra and Mr. Tarun
                                                                 Khurana, Advocates.

                                                    versus

                                 UNION OF INDIA & ANR.                               ..... Respondents
                                                    Through:     Ms. Nidhi Raman, CGSC with
                                                                 Mr. Zubin Singh, Advocates.

                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
                                                    ORDER

                          %                         15.02.2023

                          CM 16/2023 (for exemption)

1. Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The Petitioner shall file legible and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.

3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

4. Petitioner's application No. 201911031496 seeking patent of a "Blind- Stitch Sewing Machine and Method of Blind Stitching" has been deemed to be abandoned under Section 21(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 [hereinafter, "the Act"]. Placing reliance on the decision of this Court in The European Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:16.02.2023 11:03:48 Union represented by European Commission v. Union of India and Ors.,1 Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 for issuance of a mandamus to Respondent No. 2

- Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks to restore the application to its original position.

5. It is contended that the situation has occurred entirely due to fault of Petitioner's erstwhile Patent Agent and Petitioner never intended to abandon his application, as is evident from the facts and circumstances narrated in the petition.

6. Issue notice. Ms. Nidhi Raman, counsel for Respondents, accepts notice. Let counter affidavit be filed within four weeks from today. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.

7. List before the Joint Registrar for completion of pleadings on 28th March, 2023 and before Court on 24th May, 2023.

SANJEEV NARULA, J FEBRUARY 15, 2023 nk 1 Neutral citation No.: 2022/DHC/002301.