K.N.BASHA, j. - (1.) IN all these matters, the patents under challenge are Patent No.188787 in ORA/7&10/2011/PT/MUM, 189027 in ORA/8 & 11/2011/PT/MUM. The above said patents were in the name of respondent No.1. These two patents were revoked as per the order dated 12.06.2012 TRA/5&6/2008/PT/MUM and as per order dated 14.03.2013 in ORA/19 & 21/2010/PT/MUM and ORA/9 & 14/2011/PT/MUM. In view of the same, these revocation applications must also be ordered.
(2.) MRS . Tusha Malhotra, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. G.K. Muthukumar, the learned counsel for the respondent appeared before us today in all these matters. It is brought to our notice that the very same two patents subject matter of these three applications have already been revoked as per order dated 12.06.2012 in TRA/5&6/2008/PT/MUM. Therefore, it is submitted by Mr. G.K. Muthukumar, the learned counsel for the respondent that all these matters have become infructuous and on that ground these matters may be disposed off.
(3.) IT is also submitted by Mr. G.K. Muthukumar that the respondent No.1 challenged the order dated 12.06.2012 by preferring the Writ Petition No.18565 and 18566 of 2012 and the Hon'ble High Court was pleased to grant interim stay for the limited period and the said stay order was not extended further. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1, Mr. G.K. Muthukumar would submit that as the result of Writ Petition filed before the Hon'ble Madras High Court, the parties have been given liberty to move an appropriate applications before this Board according to law. Ms. Tusha Malhotra would contend that there is another application pending before this Boardand the same is not listed. It is submitted that the even in the said matter ORA/10/2011/PT/MUM it is the Patent No.188787. The learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that the applicant also filed further documents in all these matters.;