- Case number
- C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 275/2022
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- C. Hari Shankar
- Outcome
- Remanded
Headnote
Refusal under sections 3(k) and 10 set aside. The order recorded that responses had been filed to the objections and that the applicant had been heard, but made no reference to the contents of those submissions and returned no finding on their merits, the Deputy Controller simply noting his entire agreement with the Examiner and giving no reasons for it. An order which does not deal with the submissions advanced before the authority passing it suffers from manifest non-application of mind and is ex facie unreasoned, and cannot sustain in law or on facts. Such orders reduce the examination of the application, the raising of objections and the opportunity to respond to an empty paper formality. The order also returned a finding on a claim that the applicant had already withdrawn on amendment, instead of addressing the claims that survived.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.