Title: Pankaj Ravjibhai Patel Trading as Rakesh Pharmaceuticals v. SSS Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd.
Decided on: 02nd November, 2023
+ FAO (COMM) 98/2023
CORAM: HON’BLE Mr. Justice Yashwant Verma and Mr. Justice Dharmesh Sharma
Introduction
The Delhi High Court held that, if the relief sought in an IPR suit is valued at less than Rs. 3 lakhs, the competent court may investigate the “declared specified value” and the value assigned to the claims, provided that the case’s particular facts be taken into consideration when determining whether the suit was undervalued.
Facts of the Case
The current appeal challenges the order dated February 21, 2023, issued by the District Judge (Commercial), who, for the reasons specified and documented in that order, vacated the ex parte injunction that had been granted on September 25, 2021, in favor of the plaintiff/appellant. The order also requires the plaintiff/appellant to provide further documentation bolstering the Chartered Accountant’s [“CA”] certificate that was submitted in relation to the “specified value” of the suit.
Courts analysis and decision
The court said that it would be completely wrong to continue under the assumption that the disagreement at hand, which forms the basis of IPR lawsuits, would inevitably be worth at least Rs. 3 lakhs. It further said that a competent court may always investigate and determine if a certain claim had been purposefully devalued. In addition, the bench noted that it would be completely improper for it to issue a judicial fiat directing the non-commercial claims to be handled by District Judges (Commercial), even if those suits did not satisfy the CCA’s threshold requirements. It further said that an action cannot be considered by a commercial court unless the twin requirements of a commercial dispute and specified value are met.
The recommendation given by amicus curiae Advocate Swathi Sukumar regarding an additional declaration made by plaintiffs in IPR suits where the valuation is less than Rs. 3 lakhs were also deemed meritorious by the bench. Consequently, the court mandated that the plaintiff in any such action state that it has not previously taken an inconsistent stance about a specified value in any other litigation that is currently continuing or has been filed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Hargunn Kaur Makhija
