IP Intelligence › What Changed › A refusal has to be reasoned, and confined to the objections
What changed · 18 February 2026
A refusal has to be reasoned, and confined to the objections you were actually told about
What changed
In Fertin Pharma A/S v Assistant Controller, C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 25/2023, decided 18 February 2026, the Delhi High Court set aside a refusal where the Controller had departed from the hearing notice and refused on an inventive-step basis that had not been clearly identified. Reasons were described as the bedrock of a quasi-judicial order. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration by a different Controller.
Why it matters
It gives applicants a concrete, checkable ground of appeal: compare the objections in the hearing notice against the grounds in the refusal order. A mismatch is appealable.
Who should care
Any applicant facing refusal, and anyone preparing for a hearing.
What you should do
Keep the hearing notice. After a refusal, put the notice and the order side by side and list every ground in the order that was not clearly raised in the notice.
Sources & further reading
- The Patents Act, 1970 (consolidated to 1 August 2024) — Official IP India text
Related
Turning up to the hearing with nothing new
A hearing is the last chance to change the outcome before a decision is written. The Controller has already read the file, so repeating the written arguments achieve…
My application was refused. What now?
What a refusal is, and what the realistic options are.
Hearing
An oral proceeding before the Controller in which the applicant (usually through a patent agent) argues the outstanding objections, normally followed by written subm…
Not sure whether this applies to your invention?
The honest answer usually needs someone to look at your actual disclosure, your timeline and the prior art. That is a conversation, not an article.
Educational guidance, not legal advice. This material is published by Ragulika IP for general education and information. It is not legal advice, it does not create a professional-client relationship, and it is not a substitute for advice on your own facts. Patentability, infringement, prosecution strategy and every other IP outcome turn on the specific facts and on the law and Patent Office practice as they stand at the time you act. Please take professional advice before making a decision, and read the underlying provision or judgment before relying on any point stated here.
Last reviewed by Ragulika IP on 2026-08-23. Indian patent law and Patent Office practice change; check the position before you rely on it.