The Delhi High Court has directed the Controller General of the Patents, Design, and Trademarks to comply with directions of the Supreme Court given in the case of IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION.
A Single Judge bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher while conducting a hearing through video conferencing observed that, “no Court, Tribunal or any authority can act contrary to the order of the Supreme Court”. He also stated that “under Article 144 of the Constitution, all authorities whether civil or judicial, located in the territory of India are required to act in aid of the orders passed by the Supreme Court.”
The Court passed its order on the plea filed by the Intellectual Property Attorneys Association (IPAA) challenging the order of the Controller General of the Patents, Design, and Trademarks that the limitation which expires within the lockdown period shall stand extended till 18th May 2020 through its public notice date 4th May 2020
Senior Advocate Mr. Chander M. Lall appearing for the IPAA contended that the protection against triggering of the period of limitation both under general and special laws, whether condonable or not, is to kick in from 15.03.2020 and not from 25.03.2020 as is the stand taken by the respondents in its aforementioned public notice dated 04.05.2020.
Mr. Lall also submitted that “…for the respondents to fix a cut-off date i.e. 18.05.2020 for completion of various acts/proceedings, filings, payment of fees, etc. in the matters of any IP applications, not only flies in face of the Supreme Court order dated 23.03.2020 but also imposes onerous burden both on the litigants as well as their advocates.”
He added that it will be difficult for the litigants and the advocates to access their files and ensure that the filings as per prescribed procedure are made on 18.05.2020, when the lockdown itself, as it stands today, will get lifted only on 17.05.2020.
Advocate Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan appearing for the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks submitted that the clarification, if any required, qua the order of the Supreme Court can be obtained by the writ petitioners by moving that court in the matter.
Justice Shakdher penned down, “As regards the submission that a very narrow window, in terms of timeframe, has been given for filings, I find that there is merit in the same as well. I tend to agree that the respondents should not have set forth such a short deadline.”
Whereas, Justice Shakdher has directed that “the respondents shall act in accordance with the order of the Supreme Court order in Suo-MotoIn Re: Cognizance For Extension of Limitation.”
It has been held by the Supreme Court that, “To obviate such difficulties and to ensure that lawyers/litigant do not have to come physically to file such proceedings in respective Courts/Tribunals across the country including this Court, it is ordered that a period of limitation in all such proceedings, irrespective of the limitation period prescribed under the general law or Special laws whether condonable or not shall stand extended w.e.f. 15th March 2020 till further order/s to be passed by the Supreme Court in the said proceedings.”
-India Legal Bureau