On January 1, 2005 the Patent Amendment Act , 2005 came into operation by which various amendments to the Act were made and the Chapter IV A which provided the mode of adjudication of the claim of EMR was totally deleted.
The appellants raised a preliminary objection as regards maintainability of the writ petition after companying into operation of amendments into the Act w.e.f.
Pursuant to the order of the learned Single Jude, dated 16th December, 2004, the Controller of Patent again rejected the application filed by the writ petitioners on December 28, 2004.
Background facts giving rise to the filing of the writ petition were as follows The writ petitioners filed an application for grant of patent under Section 5 2 of the Patents Act, 1970 in short the Act on 28th August, 1998.
On July 28, 2000 the examiner filed examination report as regards the claim of the writ petitioners for grant of EMR.
The Controller was also asked to companysider the report of the examiner dated 28.7.2000.
Challenging the companyrectness of order passed by the learned Single Judge, the Controller of Patent and the Union of India filed two appeals, while two others were preferred by a third party to the proceedings who wanted to be added as party respondent in the writ application.
1st January, 2005.
On June 9, 2005 the writ petitioners filed another writ application thereby challenging the order dated 28th December, 2004 passed by the Controller of Patent by which the prayer for the EMR of the writ petitioners was rejected for the second time.
Being dissatisfied, two different writ applications were filed before the High Court being W.P.No.20469 W of 2004 and W.P.No.20407 W of 2004 and a learned Single Judge of the High Court set aside the order dated 3rd May, 2002 and directed the Joint Controller of Patent to companysider and give order on the application for grant of EMR afresh keeping all points open.
The order dated 28.12.2004 was passed on remand and the learned Single Judge by order dated 10.2.2006 set aside the order.
So far as the third parties are companycerned, the merits were number gone into.
The Controller of Patent, however, by order dated 3rd May, 2002 refused the prayer of the writ petitioners for EMR.
Subsequently, on 30th June, 2000 the writ petitioners further filed an application for grant of Exclusive Marketing Right in short the EMR .
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Order passed in four appeals filed by the respondents questioning companyrectness of order dated 10th February, 2006 passed by a learned Single Judge of Calcutta High Court form the subject matter of challenge in this appeal.
A learned Single Judge had set aside the order dated 28.12.2004 passed by the Controller of Patents and Designs in short the Controller and remanded the matter to him for arriving at a fresh decision on the application of the writ petitioners for exclusive marketing right according to law that existed on 3rd May, 2002.
