- Case number
- CMA(PT) 27/2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- P. B. Balaji
- Outcome
- Remanded
Headnote
Two grounds. The order moved from describing the cited documents straight to the conclusion that the invention would be obvious in the light of them and of common knowledge acquired in the course of normal research, experimentation and trial and error, without reasons and without disclosing the source of that common knowledge. And sufficiency of disclosure under section 10(4) was never properly raised in the hearing notice, so there was no opportunity to meet it.
Disposition
Allowed. Matter remitted for fresh consideration by a different Controller.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.