Introduction
The case of Niranjan Arvind Gosavi And Ors vs Innovatiview India Private Limited (CS(COMM) 214/2024) was heard in the High Court of Delhi. The matter pertained to a dispute regarding a patent, specifically Patent No. 336205. This patent, granted with a priority date of 9th July 2019, relates to a method for generating a secure barcode for a document and validating the barcode and its holder. It aims to identify fake and duplicate documents in an offline environment. The dispute arose in the context of an e-tender issued by the National Testing Agency (NTA) for a QR Code Solution with encoded texts. The plaintiffs believed that the specifications of the e-tender required the use of their patented technology.
The Defenses Presented
The Plaintiffs served a cease-and-desist notice to the defendant on 10th February 2024, alleging infringement of their patent. The Defendant, Innovatiview India Private Limited, followed up with a defense statement claiming that they had their own technology implemented, although they had not applied for a patent. They argued that even if the plaintiffs’ patent was valid, they would be protected from infringement claims under Section 47 read with 156 of the Patents Act, 1970. Section 47 of the Patents Act, which allows the government to use patented technology for its own use. They argued that they could potentially be contracted by the government, which would provide insulation from infringement claims.
The plaintiffs refuted the defendant’s argument, stating that Section 47 does not provide insulation to potential infringers. They argued that while the government can use the patent for its own purpose, an infringer can still be injuncted.
The Court’s Analysis
Firstly, the Court granted exemption from pre-institution mediation based on the Chandra Kishore Chaurasia v. R.A. Perfumery Works Private Ltd precedent.
Secondly, the Court decided not to grant an injunction at the ad-interim stage, “considering the impact it could have on the NTA’s tendering process “Considering that any order passed by this Court at an ad-interim prima facie stage would impact completion and execution of the tendering process by NTA and may potentially impact the requirement and necessity of NTA, which is a pan India examination testing agency, this Court does not consider it fit to grant injunction at this ad-interim stage“. However, the Court allowed the plaintiffs to inform the NTA about the patent dispute and its potential impact on the tendering process.
Lastly, the Court directed the defendant to maintain accounts of revenue earned if they succeed in the tendering process. It also required technical specifications to be filed in a sealed cover.
Leave a Reply