Reviewed case brief

V.K. Industries v. HCL Ltd.

2014 (60) PTC 290 (Del)

The Delhi High Court applied Section 104A of the Patents Act, 1970, holding that in suits for infringement of a process patent, the burden shifts to the defendant to prove that the process used by them is different from the patented process, provided certain conditions are met.

patentinfringementprocess-patentburden-of-proofsection-104A
Court
Delhi High Court
Year
2014
Subjects
Intellectual Property Law
Reviewed
2026-06-18

Rule established

In process patent infringement cases, Section 104A reverses the burden of proof onto the defendant to show that the process used is different from the patented process

Facts

  • V.K. Industries held a process patent for a method of manufacturing a specific product

Issues

    Held

    • Section 104A **reverses the burden of proof** in process patent infringement cases

    Ratio decidendi

    Under Section 104A of the Patents Act, 1970, in infringement proceedings relating to a process patent, the court shall presume that the defendant's identical product was obtained by the patented process unless the defendant proves otherwise. This reversal of the normal burden of proof is triggered when the product is new or when there is a substantial likelihood of the patented process being used and the patent holder cannot determine the actual process through reasonable efforts. The provision

    How to use it in an exam

    - Deploy when discussing remedies and procedural aspects of patent infringement

    Editorial source

    2014 (60) PTC 290 (Del); verified via SCC Online

    Educational summary only. Read the reported judgment or an authorised law report before relying on the case professionally.