- Case number
- (T)CMA(PT) 209/2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Outcome
- Direction to grant
Headnote
Where the Controller holds that the subject matter is not an invention at all, he cannot derive a want-of-novelty objection from the same reasoning: to invoke that provision he must first acknowledge that there is an invention, which then fails the tests of patentability. With the 2017 Guidelines the software objection had gone as well, and the Court directed the patent to be granted.
Disposition
Allowed. Impugned order set aside and the respondents directed to patent the invention. No costs.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.