Snippet: Bombay High Court on Section 104A

On March 16, 2012, the Bombay High Court delivered an order which relates to Section 104A of the Patents Act, 1970. The said order was passed in a matter between CTR Manufacturing technologies Limited (Plaintiff) and Sergi Transformer Explosion Prevention (Defendant No.1) and 2 other defendants. In this case, the question before the Court was as follows:

When a counter-claim to a suit for infringement of patent is transferred along with the suit from the District Court to the High Court, are orders passed by the District Court prior to the admission of the counter-claim and transfer to the High Court infructuous?

The High Court held that merely because Section 104A requires transfer of a suit for infringement and its counter-claim from a District Court to the High Court, it does not follow that the orders or decisions passed by the District Court prior to the transfer of the case are rendered redundant.

According to the Court, the decision of a Court remains in force until set aside by the same court or reversed by a superior court or overruled by a subsequent legislation. This rule applies even when it is later proved that the Court never had the jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

Similarly, in the case of the Patents Act, until the suit is transferred under Section 107A, all orders passed by the Court are not irrelevant. However, the Bombay High Court was of the view that all such orders would be treated as ad-interim, and consequently require to be re-heard by the High Court. This position appears to be correct since once the counter-claim is filed, it becomes necessary to assess the challenge to the validity of the patent which has a direct bearing on the sustainability of the ad interim injunction order passed earlier.

I thank Sandeep K. Rathod for sharing the order with me!