Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 3]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Telefonaktiebolaget L M Ericsson ... vs The Controller Of Patents & Designs & Anr on 12 November, 2010

Author: Jayanta Kumar Biswas

Bench: Jayanta Kumar Biswas

                                                      1




12.11.10                               In the High Court at Calcutta
  ss                                  Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                                              Appellate Side

                                    W.P. No. 21998 (W) of 2010
                              TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET L M Ericsson (publ)
                                                   v.
                               The Controller of Patents & Designs & Anr.

                        Mr    Prithwiraj Sinha
                        Ms    Mitul Dasgupta
                        Mr    Debamitra Adhikari
                        Ms    Siddiqui Parveen       ...for the petitioner.

                 Counsel submits that if directions of the authority giving the decision (at
           pp.124-148) have to be complied with, then the petitioner will be compelled to
           give incorrect declaration in Form 1. According to him, the petitioner is entitled to
           delete certain items, since they are not patentable in India, though they were
           mentioned in the international application. He says that the time to file the
           national phase application will expire on November 16, 2010. He prays for an
           order permitting the petitioner to submit the national phase application in the
           compliance with the direction of the authority without prejudice to the
           petitioner's rights and contentions.

                 In view of the above-noted situation, I am of the view that it will be
           appropriate to admit the petition. Affidavit of service has been filed stating that
           notice was given. However, none appears for the respondents.

For these reasons, I admit the petition. The petitioner will be free to submit the national phase application in compliance with the direction of the authority without prejudice to its rights and contentions. The Form 1 declaration shall not be used to level charge of misrepresentation. If the petitioner succeeds, it will be entitled to amend its application suitably and such amendments would be treated as amendments made within the period during which the petitioner is required to file the application.

The respondents shall file opposition within five weeks; reply, if any, shall be filed by one week thereafter. This order shall be communicated to all the respondents within a week and affidavit of service showing compliance shall be filed at the time of final hearing. Liberty to mention the matter for final hearing. Certified xerox.

(Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.)