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
News & Updates, Thought Leadership
Jul 17, 2026

First published by Lexology. Authors: Sandhya Singh and Sampada Kapoor Modern sport is no longer merely an athletic competition; it is a multi-billion-dollar

Managing Ambush Marketing: Legal and Commercial Perspectives
News & Updates, Thought Leadership
Jul 16, 2026

First published by IP Stars. Authors: Safir Anand and Sehr Anand In a digital landscape where the internet never forgets, an individual’s past can

The Right Not to Be Published: Inside the Delhi High Court’s Landmark ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ Judgment
News & Updates, Thought Leadership
Jul 14, 2026

First published by Lexology. Authors: Lakshmidevi Somanath and Kanishka Vaish I. The Quiet Trend of Strong Evidence Engineering Anyone who has appeared

Evidence Engineering in IP Litigation
News & Updates, Thought Leadership
Jul 14, 2026

‘First published on Legal Era’ By: Safir Anand and Omesh Puri Understanding copyright ownership in Short-Form Videos For decades, businesses measured

Understanding copyright ownership in Short-Form Videos