Skip to main content

Setting precedent for disputes involving a challenge against validity of a patent, the Supreme Court concluded that a party opposing grant of patent cannot pursue revocation petitions before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board and simultaneously seek revocation on the same grounds in a counterclaim before the High Court.

 Wind World India Ltd. (WWIL), an erstwhile joint-venture between the appellants (Enercon GmbH) and the respondents, manufactured wind turbines in India under licences granted by the appellants. Pursuant to termination of the licence agreements, WWIL continued to use the patented technologies. WWIL  filed revocation petitions before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board challenging the validity of the patents , and Enercon  filed patent infringement suits before the Delhi High Court. WWIL further filed counter claims under Section 64 of the Patents Act in the lawsuits pending before the High Court .  What resulted was a litigation ‘gridlock’ with two different forums varying in seniority and jurisdictional scope concurrently faced with the same deliberations, i.e. validity of patents.

Deciding appeals before it, the Supreme Court ruled that the same entity cannot approach multiple forums to seek revocation of the same patent. It held thus: when such a situation of parallel proceedings arises, the prior-instituted proceedings for revocation of the patent must survive, unless the patentee and the entity seeking such revocation mutually agree to continue the later-instituted proceedings – in this case the Court held that having pursued their counter-claims for revocation of the appellant’s patents after they had filed revocation proceedings in the IPAB, the respondents had opted for the latter.

The judgment therefore created a framework that balances the patentee’s rights and a person’s right to challenge the validity of a patent.

Dr. Aloys Wobben and another v Yogesh Mehra and others; CA No. 6718/2013 before the Supreme Court of India

Most Recent

News & Insights

VIEW ALL
Thought Leadership
Feb 13, 2026

‘First published on Enterprise IT World’ By: Subroto Kumar Panda How the 2026 IT Rule Amendments Protect You in the Age of AI In an era where seeing

The Digital Armor – 2026
Thought Leadership
Feb 11, 2026

Authors: Safir Anand, Mudit Kaushik and Sehr Anand The establishment of a new National Institute of Design (NID-East) in India’s eastern region,

Can New NID-East Ignite India’s Design Revolution?
News & Updates, Thought Leadership
Feb 10, 2026

‘First published on India Business Law Journal’ By: Dr. Ajai Garg and Subroto Kumar Panda Business has always been about risk, the balance between

Agentic AI: Productivity Gains, Risks and Data Demands Today
News & Updates, Thought Leadership
Jan 30, 2026

First published by Lexology. Authors: Safir Anand and Omesh Puri In today’s innovation‑driven economy, design rights have become a core element of

Proposed Reforms to India’s Design Protection Framework