Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Mahesh Gupta vs Assistant Controller Of Patents And ... on 12 December, 2022

Author: Sanjeev Narula

Bench: Sanjeev Narula

                          $~2
                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +      C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 328/2022
                                 MAHESH GUPTA                                              ..... Appellant
                                             Through:                 Mr. Saksham Garg, Advocate.

                                                       versus

                                 ASSISTANT CONTROLLER
                                 OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS                    ..... Respondent
                                              Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar,
                                                        CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra,
                                                        Mr. Sagar Mehlawat and Mr.
                                                        Alexander    Mathai        Paikaday,
                                                        Advocates.

                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
                                                       ORDER

% 12.12.2022

1. The present appeal impugns decision dated 27th December, 2018, whereby Appellant's patent application for grant of patent was refused. 1 Mr. Saksham Garg, counsel for Appellant, states that the invention, as claimed in the application, is novel/ distinct from the prior arts cited and thus, cannot be considered as lacking inventive step. Insofar as the prior arts cited by the Asst. Controller of Patents and Designs [Respondent] is concerned - Mr. Garg submits that the cited prior art D4, is not even close to the problem that is being solved Appellant's invention, for which patent application is filed. D4 is an on-board system for automotive vehicle that is permanently 1 Indian Patent Application No. 201611041718 titled - "A VEHICLE TRACKER FOR MONITORING OPERATION OF A VEHICLE AND METHOD THEREOF"

installed and connected with various other components of the vehicle. Appellant's system, on the other hand, is portable and addresses an entirely distinct problem. Further, Mr. Garg submits that the use of sensors in the Appellant's invention, are of an entirely different nature than the sensors deployed in cited prior arts.

2. Issue notice. Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, accepts notice on behalf of Respondent. Reply, if any, be filed within a period of four weeks from today.

3. Parties are directed to file their consolidated brief note of submissions, not exceeding five pages, along with relevant case law(s), in terms of IPD Rules, at least two weeks before the next date of hearing.

4. Along with the brief note, counsel shall also prepare and hand over a convenience file containing relevant pleadings, documents, and evidence on which they seek to rely upon.

5. The same shall also be handed over as well as e-mailed to the Court Master within the same timelines. Appellant is permitted to file additional documents, which were filed before the Asst. Controller of Patents and Designs, within two weeks from today.

6. List before the Joint Registrar for completion of pleadings on 10th February, 2023.

7. List before the Court on 11th May, 2023.

SANJEEV NARULA, J DECEMBER 12, 2022 nk Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:17.12.2022 17:57:17