The case of Bajaj vs. TVS Motors involves the controversy regarding the unauthorized application of the patent of the DTSi. The case is very vital regarding not only the financial stakes of the parties but also regarding the application of the doctrine of pith and marrow also termed as Doctrine of Equivalents. The case engages the questions of patent infringement by the defendant and the damages for the same. Furthermore, the case throws light upon the argument regarding justification of the risks issued by the defendant of the same case. This case was filed before the Madras High Court in 2007.The plaintiffs in (Bajaj Auto Ltd), along with the state of Maharashtra alleged the defendants (T.V.S. Motor Company Ltd.) of infringement of the patents of the plaintiffs, which apprehends the invention of the technology of advanced internal combustion engine.
The remedy sought by the plaintiffs is that of permanent injunction for obstructing the defendants from:
A. Using the technology or invention prescribed in the patents of the plaintiffs, and
B. Obstructing them from marketing, selling offering for sale or exporting 2/3 wheelers (including the proposed 125cc TVS FLAME motorcycle) that consists of the disputed internal combustion engine or product that infringes the patent. Damages for infringement of the patent were also claimed by the Plaintiffs.
The suit was under trail. The plaintiffs brought application before the same court seeking temporary injunction against the defendant for the same relief, which was sought in the suit for the permanent injunction. The application was filed for obstructing the infringement of the patent till the pendency of the suit. The defendants in the case filed a suit in the court for preventing the plaintiffs from issuing threats that the plaintiffs are infringing the defendants’ patent, through various intermediaries to and thus interfering with the launch of their product (TVS FLAME) by the plaintiffs. The suit was pending before the court. So, the defendants filed an application for preventing the defendants, till the suit is pending, from issuing threats and thereby interfering with the launch of their product under section 108 and 106 of the Patents Act, 1970.
The tests were evolved by the Supreme Court and the interim injunction was granted in favour of the applicant. The Supreme Court of India by this landmark judgment has directed all the courts in India for speedy trial and disposal of intellectual property related cases in the courts in India. In a nearly two-year-old dispute involving two companies, which have been locked in a patent dispute over the use of a twin-spark plug engine technology, the Supreme Court observed that suits relating to the matters of patents, trademarks and copyrights are pending for years and years and litigation is mainly fought between the parties about the temporary injunction. The Supreme Court directed that hearing in the intellectual property matters should proceed on day to day basis and the final judgment should be given normally within four months from the date of the filing of the suit. The Supreme Court further directed to all the courts and tribunals in the country to punctually and faithfully carry out the aforesaid orders.