Z.S. Negi, Chairman - (1.) THIS appeal under Section 116 of the Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay is directed against the order dated 24.7.2006 passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Designs whereby he allowed patent application No. 19488 for proceed to grant. After transfer of the appeal by the High Court of Bombay to the Intellectual Property Appellate Board, the appeal has been renumbered as TA/11/2007/PT/MUM.
(2.) The respondent No. 1 herein had filed Form 3 being Diary No. 307/2008 for extension of time for 8 weeks for filing counter- statement. The Deputy Registrar had observed that the matter be placed before the Appellate Board for orders. Before passing any order on Form 3 by the Appellate Board, the respondent No. 1 filed its counter-statement on 31.3.2008 and on receipt of the counter-statement, the Registry of the Appellate Board directed the respondent No. 1 to file a miscellaneous petition explaining the reasons for the delay. The respondent No. 1 filed a miscellaneous application, M.P. No. 17/2008, for condonation of delay and the said application was heard by the Appellate Board on 21.7.2008 and order reserved therein. At the time of writing order, the Appellate Board found that it has no power to condone the delay requested for. Accordingly, the Appellate Board reopened the matter and heard the reopened matter today. After hearing both sides we have, with the concurrence of both the counsel, extended the time up to 31.3.2008 for filing the counter-statement and consequently direct that the counter-statement filed by the respondent No. 1 be taken on record. In view of order passed on the Form 3 for condonation of delay, M.P. No. 17/2008 in TA/11/2007/PT/MUM becomes anfractuous.;