- Case number
- (T)CMA(PT) No.195 of 2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Outcome
- Allowed
Headnote
Refusal set aside as a non-speaking order on every limb. Proof of right was rejected without any discussion. The amended claims were disallowed under sections 57 and 59 with no reason given, although they factually narrowed the original claim. And the conclusion that the invention was obvious was reached by merely extracting the prior art documents, without any discussion of how that conclusion followed. The applicant's written submissions were not objectively considered.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice.