IPAB large bench says it has powers to review its orders

Tribunal also ordered that all review petitions pending would be listed before appropriate bench for hearing, orders

The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) has said that it has powers to review its own order in certain conditions and the power to grant interim orders pending final application, based on various guidelines. The orders were issued by two larger benches of the IPAB to decide on these issues.

The Tribunal also ordered that all the review petitions that are pending would be listed before the appropriate bench for hearing and orders.

The question of whether the IPAB has the power to review its orders and whether it has the power to grant interim orders pending final application, were raised during some earlier hearings, which lead the Board to take up the matter for a remedy.

Considering the question on the power to review its own orders, the larger Bench comprising of IPAB Chairman Justice Prabha Sridevan, Vice Chairman Usha and Technical Member (Trade Mark) V Ravi, said, "...we answer the question in the affirmative as above."

"In fact, the error apparent may be rectified earlier in review petition while it may take a longer, if the matter goes to the High Court. Therefore even if we consider the object for which IPAB was established, the power of review must be recognized," added the order.

The Bench also said that the IPAB’s orders are final and there is no appeal and considering various rules and regulations, the remedy of review must exist. However, it added, that once it is held that there is a power of review, the Board cannot limit it to errors of procedure alone but to include substantive review as explained in earlier cases, but cannot extend to rehearing of a matter which is an appeal in disguise.

Similarly, in another order related to the power to grant interim orders, the Bench comprising of IPAB Chairman Justice Prabha Sridevan, Vice Chairman Usha and Technical Member (Patent) D P S Parmar said that the Board has the power, based on certain guidelines, in order to avoid injustice.

In matters where an interim order is pressed for, the Board will first explore the possibility of the main matter can be decided expeditiously. No interim orders shall be granted without hearing the other side as provided for in Section 95 (2) with regard to interim orders pending appeal and if the Trade Mark or Patent has been in force for a considerable period that will be a condition against grant of interim order.

Factors like prima facie case, balance of convenience, irreparable injury and hardship shall be kept in mind while considering the interim order and it is preferable that the order is so worded as to bind only the parties to the proceedings and no one else, added the Bench.

The IPAB has taken the views of the counsels appeared for various litigations and the opinion from the members of the Bar before concluding the issues. There were objections raised to the Constitution of the Larger Bench on the ground that this Board has no jurisdiction for such a reference.

"We had constituted the Larger Bench only because; there were different views in the various decisions of the Board itself and in law there should be certainty. With that view alone and in the interest of justice this Larger Bench heard this question," said the order.