Keywords: Trade Mark, Patent, Delhi High Court, Authorities, Supervisory
In a recent development, the Delhi High Court has issued a significant directive, highlighting the urgent need for the regulation and supervision of trademark and patent agents in India. The court’s decision stems from numerous cases where litigants have raised allegations against these agents, underscoring the importance of oversight in this critical aspect of intellectual property law.
Justice Prathiba M Singh presiding over the case, Saurav Chaudhary v. Union of India & Anr, pointed out the substantial responsibilities that trademark and patent agents carry. These professionals play a crucial role in the application, registration, and maintenance of trademarks and patents, and they are also tasked with adhering to strict deadlines throughout the process. What has raised concerns is the absence of a supervisory or regulatory authority governing the activities of trademark and patent agents. The court noted that while there are eligibility criteria and examinations in place for individuals to qualify as patent agents under the Patents Act and Rules, these agents do not fall under the purview of the Bar Council of India or the Advocates’ Act, 1961.
The Delhi High Court acknowledged the steady increase in trademark and patent applications filed with the Indian Intellectual Property Office over the past five years. Against this backdrop, Justice Singh directed counsel representing the Central government to obtain instructions regarding how the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks (CGPDTM) intends to regulate and supervise the operations of trademark and patent agents. A report detailing the CGPDTM’s plan for overseeing these agents is expected to be submitted to the court before the next hearing, which is scheduled for November 9.
The court’s decision came in response to a petition seeking the restoration of a patent application. The petitioner had initially filed the application through M/s Delhi Intellectual Property LLP but later found it abandoned due to the lack of a response. Despite repeated attempts to communicate with the patent agent, no response was received, prompting the petitioner to engage a new patent agent. In a significant turn of events, the LLP’s patent agent,
Naveen Chaklan, appeared before the High Court on September 1 in response to a notice. Chaklan expressed the need to review emails and WhatsApp messages related to the petitioner’s case. Consequently, the court directed Chaklan to file an affidavit explaining the circumstances leading to the abandonment of the patent application.
As the matter is adjourned until November 9, the legal community awaits the Central government’s response and the proposed framework for regulating trademark and patent agents, which could have far-reaching implications for intellectual property practices in India. Advocates Meenakshi Ogra, Rishi Vohra, Tarun Khurana, and Chhavi Panday represented the petitioner, while Central Government Standing Counsel Nidhi Raman and Advocate Zubin Singh represented the Central government in this important legal case.
Name: Tanvi Bansal Semester: 3rd , College: UILS, PU , As an intern under Legal vidhiya
