Novozymes A/S v. The Controller of Patents

(T)CMA(PT) No.156 of 2023

Novozymes A/S appealed an order by The Controller of Patents rejecting its application for a patent on 'Enzyme Dehairing of Skins and Hides'. The rejection was based on lack of inventive step and being contrary to public order (harm to animals).

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Madras High Court
Case Number
(T)CMA(PT) No.156 of 2023
Judge(s)
N.Seshasayee

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Madras High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Novozymes A/S vs The Controller of Patents is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentC.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 55/2024

Agro Innovation InternationalvsThe Controller Of Patents

Agro Innovation International filed an appeal challenging the Controller of Patents' decision dated 23.02.2024, which had rejected their patent application no. 202017025064. The court allowed applications for exemption and condoned a delay of eight days in filing the appeal, subsequently issuing notice to the respondent.

patentCS(COMM) 32/2019 & I.A. 957/2019

Jhs Svengard Laboratories LimitedvsRanir Llc & Anr.

The Delhi High Court addressed a dispute concerning the unique ornamental design of toothbrushes, where JHS Svengard Laboratories claimed exclusive rights over its 'CURVY' design. The court noted that the Plaintiff sought an injunction against Defendants selling similar products and had previously initiated a trademark cancellation action against one of the defendants. Recognizing the interconnected nature of the claims, the Court ordered the transfer of the pending trademark cancellation petition to be heard alongside the current infringement suit.

patentCM/1440/2026 IN CS(OS)/1/2026

Bardana Super Hi-Tech Agro Tonic PvtvsAmcons Ipl (Agro Industrial Expansion) Pvt Ltd and Others

The plaintiff filed a commercial suit seeking permanent injunctions against the defendants for dishonestly adopting and using the impugned mark "SUPER AGRO-TECH" along with deceptively similar packaging and trade dress in relation to agricultural goods. The applicant sought dispensation of pre-institution mediation, arguing that urgent interim relief was necessary due to immediate market confusion and injury.

patentCS(COMM) 154/2020 & CC 13/2020

Astrazeneca Ab & AnrvsAjanta Pharma Limited

This is an interim order passed by the Delhi High Court in a suit concerning alleged infringement of patents. The court settled several issues, including whether the defendants' activities infringe specific patents and the validity/restoration status of one of the patents.

patentC.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 47/2025

Celligence International LlcvsDeputy Controller Of Patents And Designs

Celligence International Llc filed an appeal against an order dated 30.06.2025 issued by the Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs regarding Indian patent application no. 202117058456. The court issued notice to the respondent, directing them to file a reply within four weeks.

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