India - IPAB: the saga continues... Natco appeals :-)

Today's Times of India [Hyderabad edition] carried a news article on Natco. [link not available as yet]. It states that Natco has appealed to the Supreme Court against the Chennai High Court decision to allow IPAB to decide on Novartis/ Natco litigation for Imatinib patent application.

Since the High Court had allowed for a hearing without the technical member, the best recourse for Natco was to go the Supreme Court and it has now done so. I had earlier posted here that I find it surprising as to how can a Board decide on a technical matter without a technical member present. To me a plain reading of S.116 requires a technical member to be a part of the Appeal Board, if the appeal has been instituted under the Patent Act.

Some readers of the blog went on to argue that Chennai High Court was right under the Trade marks Act, where an Appeal Board could function without a technical member.

My reading of S.117B does NOT show that the Appeal Board [as needed under S.116 of Patent Act] is over ruled/ can be replaced by a TM Appeal Board. Hence a Board constituted under the TM Act may very well be legally correct for a TM Appeal, it does not make the present situation right.

Personally, since I come from the industry, I have an issue with the 2 member non-technical board. If we allow this now, then we are condoning a lapse in law. S.116 is NOT subjective. Either we stick to it or we start a process of erosion…