Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. Let me now discuss the rival submission of the parties.

7. In case, the plaint and documents filed along with the plaint as well as the statement made in the present application are read together, it appears to the Court that the main objection of defendant No.2 is that the present patent infringement suit is barred by various provisions of the Act as the same has not been filed by the holder of an exclusive licence as defined under the Act and the exclusive licence was not registered with the patent office at the time of filing of the suit. Therefore, the said alleged exclusive licence agreement shall have no effect in law and even otherwise, the same is not valid on various reasons, namely, the plaintiff has deliberately backdated the rights to the exclusive licence from 1st January, 2006, although the exclusive licence agreement provides that the same is dated 1st August, 2006; it is also not duly stamped under the Stamp Act. No stamp duty has been paid in India. As the said exclusive licence agreement has not been registered, the same cannot be relied upon for the purpose of granting an exclusive licence in favour of the plaintiff and there is no valid cause of action to file the suit against defendants. The plaintiff was also not serious to get the said exclusive licence agreement registered being defective, as the plaintiff has filed the application before the Controller of Patent only on 15th March, 2010. The expression "exclusive licence" has been defined under Section 2(f) of the Act which means "A licence from a patentee which confers on the licensee, or on the licensee and persons authorised by him, to the exclusion of all other persons (including the patentee), any right in respect of the patented invention, and exclusive licensee shall be construed accordingly." The plaintiff, under these circumstances, cannot derive the benefit of Section 109 of the Act to file the suit for infringement of patent against defendants No.1 & 2.