In a crisp order on the Bajaj-TVS patent dispute, the Supreme Court ordered that TVS shall be entitled to sell its motorcycle ‘Flame’, but shall maintain an accurate record of all its domestic and international sales. It has asked the Hon’ble Madras High Court to appoint a receiver in this connection.
The Court clarified that its observations did not in anyway reflect its position on the merits of the case and the same shall be borne by the Single Judge of the Madras High Court when the actual suit is heard by him. The Court further ordered that the suit should be finally disposed of on or before November 30th, 2009.
Observing that in cases involving intellectual property, parties often spend years fighting on temporary injunction, the Court drew attention to proviso to Order XVII, Rule 1(2) of the C.P.C which states that when the hearing of the suit has commenced, it shall be continued from day-to-day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined, unless the Court finds that, for exceptional reasons to be recorded by it, the adjournment of the hearing beyond the following day is necessary.
The Court cited its previous decision on the aforementioned proviso, Shree Vardhman Rice v. Amar Singh Chawalwala, where it held thus:
“In our opinion, in matters relating to trademarks, copyright and patents the proviso to Order XVII Rule 1(2) C.P.C. should be strictly complied with by all the Courts, and the hearing of the suit in such matters should proceed on day to day basis and the final judgment should be given normally within four months from the date of the filing of the suit.”
Reiterating the same, the Apex Court directed that the timeline stipulated above be adhered to “punctually and faithfully” by all Courts and Tribunals in the country. This bodes well for IP cases, more so in the absence of dedicated patent or IP courts.
can a party aggrieved by the decision (likely to come by November 30 ) of such leaned single Judge of Madras High court, can further appeal in higher courts (Divisional bench of High Court or the Supreme Court)???????