The Bombay High Court in Ashit Padhaya v. Assistant Controller of Patents stressed the necessity for Controllers to disclose all evidence considered to parties involved in post-grant opposition proceedings. This enforcement of procedural transparency aligns with the principles of fairness in patent adjudications.
Bombay High Court Emphasizes Transparency in Patent Decisions
The Bombay High Court has rendered a pivotal judgment in Ashit Padhaya v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, asserting that the Controller must disclose all evidence relied upon during patent decisions, particularly in post-grant opposition proceedings. This ruling reinforces the judicial scrutiny mechanism regarding the standard of obviousness applicable to patent offers.
In its analysis, the Court highlighted that the absence of shared evidence from the Controller to the Opponent Board or patentee can compromise the fairness of the process. The criticism centers on the Controller's reliance on undisclosed evidence when revoking a patent, which undermines the objective of transparent and equitable patent examination.
This ruling is a significant development for patent practitioners, as it sets forth a clear expectation that all parties must be privy to the evidentiary base upon which decisions are made. Legal advisers should now ensure that their opposition tactics account for this requirement, possibly changing the way patent validity challenges are approached based upon previously undisclosed evidence.
Citations
- Ashit Padhaya v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs (2026) BHC
