# HUNTINGTON ALLOYS CORPORATION vs UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS

Court: Bombay High Court
Date: 2026-04-07
Citation: WP/2086/2021
Petitioner: HUNTINGTON ALLOYS CORPORATION
Respondent: UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS

[Official PDF on Bombay High Court website](https://bombayhighcourt.gov.in/bhc/file/download/eyJpdiI6IkwyUS9wVmxGVmhWb0FDa2lzeEZZZWc9PSIsInZhbHVlIjoiK0VTYm02NmJHeThHN1lIQXpMUmdPN1JiSldHdVhMazlsWGU0dUZwanRhQXFnU1NPbUFERkx6ZFU1OEdUR2thc0U4a3hxL0ozeERnWHNiWCthVFNocUE9PSIsIm1hYyI6ImNhZjk0YmEwOTBhYmE4ZThiYTRiM2IyZmM3MTFiOThkNjIzNjA0MGIwODFkNzliMWEzZmM2ODA1OTliYTgzMzMiLCJ0YWciOiIifQ==?expires=1782759244&signature=9aa5bb2f1b0e260255b0502d476900a07b46df47fe6604fb48719b6005c89445)

## Judgment text (excerpt)

1/15 WP-2086-21.odt Salgaonkar MANDIRA MILIND SALGAONKAR 4. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE & MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 07th APRIL, 2026 ... JUDGMENT (PER BHARATI DANGRE, J.) 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith, by consent. 2. The Petitioner, a Corporation incorporated under the laws of USA, is aggrieved by the order dated 18/11/2020 passed by the Deputy Controller of Patents and further order dated 06/04/2021 passed by the Department of Atomic Energy, thereby rejecting the Patent Application of the Petitioner dated 09/11/2010. 2/15 WP-2086-21.odt 3. Heard learned counsel Mr.Rohan Kadam for the Petitioner. According to Mr.Kadam, the orders passed by the Respondents suffer from lack of jurisdiction, non-application of mind and being unreasoned orders, are liable to be quashed and set aside. The challenge to the impugned orders is raised in the background facts that on 09/04/2008, the Petitioner filed an National Phase Patent application (PCT/US2009/040019) and it was allotted number IN’4211, which was published under Section 11-A of the Patents Act, 1970 (for short, “Act of 1970”). The Petitioner filed the request for examination of Application on 09/03/2012, but no steps were tak

https://niyam.ai/judgements/high-court/2026/april/huntington-alloys-corporation-vs-union-of-india-and-3-ors