File Copyright Online - File mutual Divorce in Delhi - Online Legal Advice - Lawyers in India

Whether Court Can Allow Production Of 3rd Party Agreement In Patent Infringement Litigation?

In a commercial suit for patent infringement, A filed an application seeking production of third party agreement of B. The Commercial Court allowed the same. A filed application under Order 43 R1 seeking review of the order, it is B's contention that when interrogatories were already refused, there was no need to allow production of third party agreement because as per pleading, it has no relevance.

The HC refused to interfere, holding that review jurisdiction is not an appeal and not every error can be corrected here. The court cannot look into pleadings and detailed evidence and their reasoning in review jurisdiction[1].
  1. A review can by no means an appeal in disguise where an erroneous decision is reheard and corrected, as has been sought to be urged in the present matter. Throughout, the emphasis has been on the erroneous understanding of the pleadings of the parties, which, has resulted in erroneous conclusions, resulting further in erroneous decisions.
  2. A rehearing is not possible to correct all these "errors". Such a re-hearing and re-appraisal of the material on record including pleadings, would fall within the scope of an appeal and not review. "Error" has to be an error apparent on the face of the record to attract the provisions of Order XLVII Rule 1 of the CPC and must be a patent error which alone can be looked into in review proceedings.
  3. Fresh and additional material cannot be pressed into service to seek a review of an order. Minor mistakes of inconsequential importance are insufficient to seek a review. Only when circumstances of a substantial and compelling character make it necessary to do so, can review be sought. The normal principle is that what is pronounced by the court is final, else, there must be some manifest wrong caused leading to miscarriage of justice.

    Particular, while seeking review of orders passed in a civil suit, the grounds mentioned in Order XLVII Rule 1 of the CPC have to be satisfied, which would not equate the hearing with the original hearing of the case or a hearing in an appeal. Even where the view adopted by the court is a possible view that can be taken, it would not be a case of an error apparent on the face of the record.
  1. CS(COMM) 383/2020
Written By: Shubham Budhiraja (Advocate, Delhi High Court)
Email: [email protected], Ph no: 9654055315

Law Article in India

Ask A Lawyers

You May Like

Legal Question & Answers

Lawyers in India - Search By City

Copyright Filing
Online Copyright Registration


How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi


How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...

Increased Age For Girls Marriage


It is hoped that the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which intends to inc...

Facade of Social Media


One may very easily get absorbed in the lives of others as one scrolls through a Facebook news ...

Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...


The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of t...

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in India: A...


The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a concept that proposes the unification of personal laws across...

Role Of Artificial Intelligence In Legal...


Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing various sectors of the economy, and the legal i...

Lawyers Registration
Lawyers Membership - Get Clients Online

File caveat In Supreme Court Instantly