- within Corporate/Commercial Law topic(s)
The case of Asian Electronics Ltd. Vs. Jumbo Electric Company 2010 (42) PC 99 (Del.)} a suit for permanent injunction was filed for the infringement a patent held in respect of a conversion kit to change fluorescent lighting units' inductive operation to electronic operation. The invention claimed by Asian Electronics Ltd was to the effect that their patented conversion kit enabled the fitting of a tube described as T12 to be used for a sleeker and shorter length tube called as T5.
Earlier an application moved for interim injunction had been granted, ex parte, in favour of Asian Electronics Ltd. restraining Jumbo Electronics from manufacturing, selling, distributing the conversion kit embodying Asian Electronics' patent. Jumbo Electric Co. thereafter moved an application under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC for vacation of the ex parte injunction.
Asian Electronics contended that Jumbo Electronics was manufacturing and selling identical conversion kits, and one such kit was purchased by Asian Electronics which was manufactured by Jumbo Electronics Company, from an electronic shop in Delhi .It was further stated that they had not granted any license to the Jumbo Electronics for the use of the said patent and therefore manufacturing of lighting units and conversion kits by Jumbo Electronics was unauthorized and amounted to infringement of Asian Electronics' patent rights.
The court after perusal of the plaint concluded that by wording the pleadings deceptively, production of a product which is not violative of any patent cannot be stalled. In order to constitute violation of a patent, it is essential to show that the invention claimed involved some technical or scientific advancement as compared to the existing products of knowledge. Creating of a conversion device (adopter) is not an offence unless it involves copying of a unique electronic circuit invented by someone. Asian Electronics failed to establish how Jumbo Electronics had copied its invention and, the Court concluded that there is no bar in using the existing inventions by other persons. In this view, the ex parte injunction was vacated and application vide Order 39 Rule 4 CPC, with a concluding remark that getting a patent in respect of a conversion kit did not imply that Asian Electronics gets monopoly over its use.
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.