GSP Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. v. BR Agrotech Limited & Anr.

Clear admissions concerning the sale of a patented product can justify judgment on admission under Order XII Rule 6 CPC without requiring a prolonged trial on an admitted issue.

SHORT DESCRIPTION ABOUT THE CASE:

This patent infringement case concerns an agrochemical formulation protected by Indian Patent No. 3945681. The Delhi High Court considered whether admissions made by a defendant concerning the composition and sale of the impugned product were sufficient to justify judgment on admission under Order XII Rule 6 CPC.

FACTS:

GSP Crop Science was the proprietor of Indian Patent No. 3945681 relating to a synergistic suspo-emulsion formulation containing specified proportions of Pyriproxyfen and Diafenthiuron.

The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were dealing in an identical formulation without the plaintiff’s consent. An interim injunction had earlier been granted, and the suit had already been decreed against one defendant pursuant to settlement.

Against the remaining defendant, the plaintiff filed an application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC seeking judgment on admission. The defendant had admitted that it was engaged in marketing and selling the impugned formulation and that the composition corresponded to the patented formulation.

FINDINGS:

The Court examined Section 48 of the Patents Act, which grants the patentee exclusive rights in respect of making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the patented product.

The Court found that the composition of the defendant’s product corresponded with the patented formulation and that the defendant had admitted its role as marketer/seller.

The Court held that clear admissions could form the basis for judgment on admission. The purpose of Order XII Rule 6 is to avoid unnecessary trial where the material facts necessary for granting relief are sufficiently admitted.

The suit was decreed against the remaining defendant. The Court also directed payment of ₹50 lakh as damages and ₹2 lakh as costs/special costs.

SUGGESTION:

In patent litigation, pleadings and documents should be examined carefully for admissions concerning composition, manufacturing, marketing, sales and use of the patented invention.

A defendant’s admission in affidavits, correspondence, invoices or pleadings may become significant for an application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC. Plaintiffs should therefore identify clear admissions rather than unnecessarily proceeding to full trial on facts that are already established.

JUDGMENT / PRINCIPLE:

Where material facts relating to infringement are clearly admitted, the Court may use Order XII Rule 6 CPC to avoid an unnecessary trial. In this case, the admitted sale and marketing of a product having the same patented composition supported judgment on admission and monetary relief.