BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM PHARMA GMBH AND CO KG vs THE CONTROLLER OF PATENTS & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 26.11.2025 Pronounced on: 24.02.2026 + LPA 129/2025, CM APPL. 10551/2025 BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM PHARMA GMBH AND CO KG .....Appellant Through: Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mr. Prashanto Chandra Sen, Sr. Advs. with Dr Sanjay Kumar, Ms. Arpita Sawhney, Ms. Pallavi Kiran, Mr. Arun Kumar Jana, Ms. Pratiksha Varshney, Ms. Shivangi Mayaramka, Ms. Atiksha Girdhar, Mr. Siddhart Seem and Ms. Rashmi Goswami, Advs. versus THE CONTROLLER OF PATENTS & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Nidhi Raman, CGSC with Mr. Arnav Mittal, GP with Mr. Mayank Sansanwal, Adv. for R-1 Mr. G. Nataraj, Mr. Rahul Bhujbal, Mr. Yash Raj and Mr. Jegadheesh R., Advs. for R-2 Ms. Swathi Sukumar, Sr. Adv. (Amicus Curiae) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA % JUDGMENT 24.02.2026 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. Signature Not Verified LPA 129/2025 Digitally Signed By:AJIT Page 1 of 41 KUMAR Signing Date:24.02.2026 16:10:52 [Statutory provisions have been reproduced to the extent relevant.] A. The lis 1. This appeal raises the following two pure questions of law: (i) Whether a revocation petition, under Section 641 of the Patents Act 1970, can be instituted or can survive after the petitioner has pleaded invalidity of the patent, of which revocation is being sought, as a defence under Section 107(1)2 of the Patents Act, in a suit instituted by the patentee against it? (ii) Whether a revocation petition can be instituted or can continue after the patent, of which revocation is being sought, has expired? 2. These questions were raised by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GMBH3, as Respondent 2 in CO (COMM IPD-PAT) 38/2022, instituted by Macleods Pharmaceuticals Limited4 under Section 64 of the Patents Act. 3. Both questions have bee