N.Solomon v. S.A.Safiullah and The Controller of Patents Patent Office

(T)OP(PT)11/2023

N.Solomon filed a petition seeking the revocation of Patent No. 198079, which was granted to S.A.Safiullah. The court noted that the term of the said patent had expired.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Madras High Court
Case Number
(T)OP(PT)11/2023
Judge(s)
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

Practitioner Note

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

Related Cases

patentC.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 7/2023

Syngenta Participations AgvsController Of Patents And Designs

Syngenta appealed the rejection of its patent application (No. 872/DELNP/2011) for 'Crop Safeners' by the Deputy Controller of Patents & Designs. The primary objection was the lack of specification regarding the ratio of constituents and novelty issues. The High Court found that the suggested amendments could address the non-specification issue and remanded the application for a fresh hearing.

patent1994IIIAD(DELHI)1273

Ved PrakashvsSamir Kumar And Ors.

The Delhi High Court addressed an interim injunction application concerning the use of the trade mark 'CMCS' in computer training. The plaintiff, Ved Prakash, sought protection against defendants who were using a similar mark. However, the court noted that the mark was essentially the abbreviation of a pre-existing Government Undertaking operating in the same field. Given this prima facie evidence suggesting piracy by the plaintiff, the application for injunction was dismissed, though the defendants were directed to maintain proper accounts.

patentCS(COMM) 264/2023

J. B. Chemicals And Pharmaceuticals LtdvsMahendra Singh And Anr

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of J. B. Chemicals And Pharmaceuticals Ltd against Mahendra Singh and Anr regarding trademark infringement. The Plaintiff, owner of the 'BIZFER' marks for pharmaceutical products, successfully argued that the Defendants' use of the similar mark 'VIZFER' constituted deceptive similarity. Given the potential negative ramifications for public health and safety due to the alleged unauthorized use in the pharma sector, the court restrained the Defendants from manufacturing or marketing the impugned mark until further hearing.

patentFAO(OS) (COMM) 204/2025

Novo Nordisk A/SvsDr Reddys Laboratories Limited & Anr.

Novo Nordisk appealed a rejection of its interlocutory injunction application regarding the import and sale of Semaglutide, claiming infringement of its patent. The court dismissed the appeal, noting that the suit patent was set to expire shortly, but also found prima facie evidence suggesting the suit patent could be challenged for obviousness based on prior art (Genus Patent IN'964).

patentCMA(TM).No.23 of 2024

M/S. Nichino Private LimitedvsThe Registrar of Trademarks

The Madras High Court overturned the Trademark Registry's refusal to register the word mark 'METAMORPH' in Class 5 (pesticides/herbicides). The court found that the Registrar erred by assuming prior long-term use of a cited mark, especially since that application was initially filed on a 'proposed to be used' basis. The judgment mandates the Registry to re-examine the case, considering the appellant's claims regarding non-similarity and potential entitlement under Section 12 of the Trademarks Act.

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