BRB Legal

IP Case Digest · Patents Act s.108

Section 108, Patents Act: case law

3 judgments of the Delhi High Court applying Patents Act s.108, from 2025, each with a headnote by BRB Legal.

3judgments
1court
2025years

Fmc Corporation & Ors. v. Natco Pharma Limited, CS(COMM) 607/2024

Delhi High Court · Injunction refused

Interim injunction refused in a quia timet action under sections 48 and 108. The plaintiffs failed to make out a prima facie case, and the balance of convenience and irreparable harm did not favour them. The Court was persuaded that damages, if proved at trial, would be compensable: the plaintiffs appeared to have licensed their rights to two entities whose packaging indicated as much, though the agreements were not placed on record, and they were importing the drug into India, so they were monetising the invention.

Crystal Crop Protection Limited v. Safex Chemicals India Limited And Ors., CS(COMM) 196/2024 & CC(COMM) 28/2024

Delhi High Court · Injunction granted

Interim injunction refused in a patent infringement suit over a weedicidal formulation. The Court took the prima facie view that the dyeing agent or pigment could not be treated as a non-essential element of the suit patent, the plaintiff having itself highlighted the advantages derived from its presence, so no prima facie case of infringement was made out. Having so found, it declined to examine validity, which the defendants had attacked by counterclaim, holding that at an interim stage the Court takes a prima facie view and is not required to resolve contested issues of fact, as that would convert the hearing into a mini-trial.

Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Maj (Retd) Sukesh Behl & Ors.

Delhi High Court · Disposed of

Three suits on the DVD standard essential patent decreed and all counter-claims dismissed. The revocation grounds failed: section 64(1)(m) on non-disclosure of corresponding foreign applications under section 8, section 64(1)(e) on prior public knowledge and use, and section 64(1)(j) on suppression and fraud across the parent and divisional applications. Damages were awarded, including additional damages of one crore rupees against two defendants, with full commercial costs on the Uflex principle. The Court recorded that the defendants had altered their defences at different stages and used delay until the patent lapsed, which reduced the patentee to monetary relief alone. A certificate of validity was directed under section 113.

Other provisions of the Patents Act

All 218 judgments on the Patents Act, 1970 Search the IP Case Digest