This podcast examines the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta (‘High Court’) on an appeal (AID NO. 11 OF 2021) filed by Decco Worldwide Post Harvest Holdings B.V & Anr. (‘Appellant’) seeking to set aside an order (‘impugned order’) passed by the Controller of Patents and Designs (‘Respondent’) refusing the grant of the Appellant’s patent application for being a method of agriculture under Section 3(h) of the Act, apart from lacking an inventive step and having insufficient disclosure.
The High Court, after considering the facts of the case, decided that the assessment of the claimed invention by the Respondent was erroneous and remanded the application back to the Respondent to examine the subject patent application afresh including the question of patentability, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. This podcast specifically focuses on the opinion of the High Court with respect to the assessment of inventions under Section 3(h) of the Act.
This podcast is based on a recent article by Srinivasan T. and Eeshita Das.
Link to the article: Patent of method of treating a plant – Interpretation of Section 3(h) | Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan Attorneys (lakshmisri.com)
Voice: Nikita Chauhan and Devesh Aswal