Novartis Ag v. Controller Of Patents And Designs & Anr.

W.P.(C)-IPD 50/2025 & CM 209-210/2025 (and connected matters)

Novartis Ag challenged the Controller's orders that deferred and then reserved decisions regarding post-grant opposition proceedings, specifically concerning a request for cross-examination of the opponent's experts in relation to Patent IN'518. The court dismissed the writ petitions, finding no merit in the Petitioner's plea and noting that the Petitioner had waived their right to cross-examine by conscious election.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court
Case Number
W.P.(C)-IPD 50/2025 & CM 209-210/2025 (and connected matters)
Judge(s)
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Delhi High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Novartis Ag vs Controller Of Patents And Designs & Anr. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentITA No.1584/DEL/2025 (A.Y.2018-19)

International Bridge Technologies Middle East DMCCvsDeputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation, (2)(1)(1)

The assessee, a UAE-based company engaged in bridge design, challenged an assessment order classifying professional fees received for providing Design Support Services for the Versova-Bandra Sea Link Project as taxable royalty. The assessee argued that since ownership of the designs was outrightly transferred to Systra India, it constituted a sale of intellectual property rather than a right to use, thus not falling under the DTAA definition of royalty.

patentCivil Suit (Comm.Div.) No. 286 of 2018

Quality Chef Agro Foods Pvt.Ltd.vsRanjith Agro Foods & Ors.

This Madras High Court case involves a dispute over the trademark 'ROYALCHEF' used for exporting rice and food products from India to Qatar. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants are infringing their exclusive rights through passing off and unfair competition by using an identical or deceptively similar mark. The suit seeks a permanent injunction, destruction of offending goods, payment of profits, and substantial damages. The court has proceeded with the trial, examining evidence and documents related to trademark usage and alleged infringement.

patentCS (COMM) 59/2022

SNPC Machines Private LimitedvsPankaj Rana

SNPC Machines Private Limited filed a suit seeking permanent injunction against infringement of its patents, copyright, and misappropriation of trade secrets related to a brick-making machine. The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement, which was recorded by the Court.

patentCS(COMM) 823/2018

Merck Sharp & Dohme CorpvsSanjeev Gupta

The commercial suit for patent infringement concerning Sitagliptin (protected by IN 209816) was settled between Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp and Sanjeev Gupta & Ors. The Defendants acknowledged the validity of the patent and agreed to cease all infringing activities, including manufacturing generic versions, until the patent expires.

patentCS(COMM) 233/2021

Alkem Laboratories Ltd.vsNava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

In this trademark infringement suit concerning pharmaceutical products, the Delhi High Court addressed the plaintiff's request for immediate interim injunction. The court declined to grant an ex parte order, emphasizing that the defendants had claimed prior use of the mark since 2018 and that public interest required them to be given a chance to respond. Consequently, notice was issued to the defendants, allowing the litigation process to proceed with due consideration for all parties.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Dealing with a patent challenge?

Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.

Talk to our patent team →

Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call