Madras High Court
Arumugam Rajendra Babu vs Ashok Leyland Limited on 22 October, 2021
OSA (CAD) No.91 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.10.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
OSA (CAD) No.91 of 2021
Arumugam Rajendra Babu ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Ashok Leyland Limited,
rep. by its Managing Director,
No.1, Sardar Patel Road,
Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.
2.Sun Mobility,
rep. by its Chairman,
'Maini Sadan', No.38, 3rd Floor,
7th Cross Street, Lavellee Road,
Bengaluru-560 001.
3.Virya Mobility 5.0 LLP,
rep. by its Managing Partner,
'Maini Sadan', No.38, 3rd Floor,
7th Cross Street, Lavellee Road,
Bengaluru-560 001.
__________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
OSA (CAD) No.91 of 2021
4.Sun New Energy Systems,
rep. by its Chairman,
'Maini Sadan', No.38, 3rd Floor,
7th Cross Street, Lavellee Road,
Bengaluru-560 001.
5.Sun Mobility Private Limited,
rep. by its Managing Director
Having address at:
Block No.41/4 & 5 Speed Bird House,
Connaught Circus, New Delhi,
Central Delhi – 110 001.
And also at:
Epsilson Office,
A1, First Floor,
Kariyammana Agrahara,
Yemalu, Bengaluru-560 037. ... Respondents
Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause XV of the Madras High Court Letters
Patent read with Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015
against the order dated 01.09.2021 passed in A.No.2655 of 2021 in
C.S. (Comm.Div.) No.400 of 2019 on the file of this Court.
For the Appellant : Mr.S.P.Vijayaragavan
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The appeal is clearly not maintainable.
2. The appeal has been filed in a commercial suit. The
appellant, as plaintiff in a patent action, sought a direction from the
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
OSA (CAD) No.91 of 2021
trial court to have the Controller of Patents give evidence pertaining
to the features of the appellant's products and the distinction
between the appellant's earlier patent and the subsequent patent.
3. By the order impugned dated September 1, 2021, the
prayer has been declined. According to the appellant, the
application made before the trial court was under Order XVI Rule 2
of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
4. Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 permits
appeals from such orders that are specifically enumerated under
Order XLIII of the Code. Nothing in Order XLIII of the Code permits
the present appeal to be maintained.
5. It is elementary that the right of appeal has to be found in
a statute and does not inhere in any person. Since the scope of
appellability is extremely restricted under the Act of 2015, as held
by this Bench in a judgment rendered reported at 2021 SCC OnLine
Mad 5428 (Hindustan Unilever Limited v. S.Shanthi), the present
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
OSA (CAD) No.91 of 2021
appeal is dismissed as not maintainable without going into the
merits thereof.
6. OSA (CAD) No.91 of 2021 is dismissed. C.M.P.No.16964 of
2021 is closed.
There will be no order as to costs.
(S.B., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.)
22.10.2021
Index : No
sasi
To:
The Sub Assistant Registrar,
Original Side,
High Court of Madras.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
OSA (CAD) No.91 of 2021
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
(sasi)
OSA (CAD) No.91 of 2021
22.10.2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
