India: The Supreme Court Of India On Paving A Clearer Path For Patent Revocation Proceedings

Last Updated: 29 December 2014
Article by Phoenix Legal


In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of India clarified the position on multiplicity of proceedings with respect to patent cases. On June 2, 2014 in the case of Dr. Aloys Wobben vs. Yogesh Mehra and Others1, a division bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice J.S. Khehar and Justice A.K. Patnaik held that a patent revocation proceeding based on similar issues cannot be simultaneously pursued before the Patent Office, the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) and the relevant High Court, and if a party initiates revocation proceedings before any one forum, it would be precluded from initiating similar proceedings before the other available forums.


2.1 Dr. Aloys Wobben (Appellant) is an engineer and holds several patents in India to his credit in the field of wind turbine generators and wind energy convertors. He licensed his patents to the Respondents through Enercon GmbH. The license agreement was terminated by Enercon GmbH due to breach of the agreement by the Respondents, however, even after the termination of the agreement, the Respondents continued the use of the patents, without any due authority.

2.2 The Respondents filed several revocation petitions before the IPAB under Section 64(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 (Act) seeking revocation of the Appellant's patents. The Appellant in retaliation went on to file several patent infringement suits before the High Court of Delhi (High Court). Post filing of the infringement suits by the Appellant, the Respondents filed further revocation petitions before the IPAB. Also, in response to the infringement suits filed by the Appellant, the Respondents filed counter-claims seeking revocation of patents before the High Court. The relief sought by the Respondents in the counter-claims before the High Court and the revocation petitions before the IPAB was identical, i.e. for revocation of the Appellant's patents.


3.1 The Appellant contended that where a counter-claim was instituted in response to a suit for infringement of a patent in the High Court, there could be no further proceedings in the revocation petition filed before the IPAB. The Appellant further contended that it would make no difference, whether such proceedings before the IPAB had been instituted prior to, or after the filing of the suit for infringement.

3.2 The second contention advanced by the Appellant was that the jurisdiction of the High Court to decide a counter-claim for revocation was exclusive and could not be taken away by initiating simultaneous proceedings before the IPAB. The Appellant asserted that the proceedings before the High Court in furtherance of the counter-claim would negate all similar proceedings against the same patent on the same grounds before the sub-ordinate forum, viz, the IPAB. This, the Appellant explained, would be for the simple reason that the inferior forum would have to make way for the superior forum.

3.3 Thirdly, the Appellant contended that the jurisdiction to decide a counter-claim seeking revocation of a patent in a suit for infringement vested with the High Court could not be taken away by an independent petition, for revocation of the same patent and on the same grounds, pending before the IPAB. To assert this argument, the Appellant argued that the IPAB is only an administrative tribunal which was neither superior to the High Court nor vested with a status that was equal to that of the High Court. Therefore, any determination by the IPAB, which could be corrected by the High Court (through a writ petition), should not be allowed to disrupt the plea of revocation raised through a counter-claim before the High Court.


4.1 The Supreme Court accepted the contention of the Appellant that a counter claim before the High Court and a revocation petition before the IPAB cannot be availed of simultaneously under Section 64(1) of the Act. The Supreme Court further observed that even though more than one remedies are available to the Respondents under Section 64 of the Act, the word "or" used therein is to be read in a disjunctive manner, which would thus disentitle the Respondents from availing both the remedies, for the same purpose, simultaneously. The Supreme Court further stated that if such an interpretation is not given to Section 64 of the Act, it could lead to a situation wherein the IPAB and the High Court could come up with different conclusions on the same dispute.

4.2 The Supreme Court further examined the issue that if a party is eligible to file either a revocation petition or a counter-claim for revocation of a patent in an infringement suit, which remedy is the correct course for the party to pursue. The Supreme Court analyzed several provisions of the Act but could not deduce an answer to this issue from such deliberation. Therefore, it made a reference to Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), which lays down the principle of res judicata. The Supreme Court observed that a counterclaim must be understood as a separate suit in itself, which is filed by a defendant and is tried jointly with the suit filed by the plaintiff, and has the same effect as a cross-suit. Therefore, for all intent and purposes a counter-claim is treated as a plaint, and is governed by the rules applicable to plaints. The Supreme Court held that as a counter-claim is in the nature of an independent suit, it cannot be allowed to proceed where the defendant has already initiated legal recourse based on the same cause of action in a different forum. 4.3 The Supreme Court stressed that the above conclusion is imperative for a harmonious interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Act and therefore on similar lines, if a counter-claim was filed by the Respondents before the revocation petition, it would not be open for the Respondents to proceed with the later filed revocation petition as the same would be barred by the rule of res judicata.

4.4 Additionally, the Supreme Court also took note of a consent order passed by the High Court, wherein both parties had agreed that all pending suits and counter-claims should be consolidated and adjudicated upon by the High Court. While accepting the contention of the Appellant, the Supreme Court held that having consented to one of the available remedies postulated under the law, it was not open to either of the consenting parties to seek redressal from another forum in addition to the consented forum. Thus, the Supreme Court affirmed the consent order passed by the High Court thereby directing the Respondents to pursue the counter-claims before the High Court while dropping the revocation petitions filed before the IPAB.


5.1 Multiple forum shopping has been one of the usual tactics of litigants to exert pressure on each other. This decision of the Supreme Court was thus much required to put a curb on such tactics and consequently on multiplicity of proceedings in patent related disputes. Litigants seeking revocation of a patent would now have to carefully plan and choose an appropriate forum to seek redressal.

5.2 Although it is apparent that the Supreme Court, vide this judgment, intends to streamline patent litigation in India, it appears that the court may have overlooked certain connected issues, which still remain unanswered. For one, the court did not address a situation wherein if there is a revocation petition pending before the IPAB and a subsequent infringement suit is filed before a High Court, would the concerned High Court be required to await the decision of the IPAB on the validity of the patent in question? Further, how would a situation be addressed wherein on one hand the defendant is barred from initiating a counter-claim before a High Court (by virtue of a previously filed revocation petition before the IPAB) but on the other hand Section 107 of the Act allows the defendant to raise grounds of revocation as a valid defense (through a written statement as opposed to a counter-claim) in a suit for infringement?

5.3 Absence of clear law on the above mentioned connected issues would in all likelihood lead to anomalous situations. A stay on the later filed proceedings till the prior proceeding is concluded may be the answer. But whether this answer would be provided by another court decision or statutory amendments to the Patents Act, is anybody's guess.


1 Civil Appeal No. 6718 OF 2013

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Singh & Singh Lall & Sethi (SSL&S)
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Singh & Singh Lall & Sethi (SSL&S)
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions