The Calcutta High Court has granted interim protection to NOCIL Limited, a rubber chemicals manufacturer belonging to the Arvind Mafatlal Group, in a patent infringement and confidentiality dispute involving Finorchem Ltd and a former NOCIL employee.
Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur, in an order passed in October, found that NOCIL had established a strong prima facie case for interim relief. The Court also held that the balance of convenience favoured the company and that refusing protection could result in irreparable injury.
The dispute concerns process patents held by NOCIL for manufacturing 4-Aminodiphenylamine (4-ADPA), a chemical intermediate used in the production of antioxidants.
Patent Infringement and Confidentiality Allegations
NOCIL approached the High Court alleging infringement of its patented manufacturing processes and breach of confidentiality by Finorchem and a former employee.
Through its interim application, the company sought orders restraining the respondents from misappropriating or misusing its confidential information and trade secrets, alongside protection against alleged infringement of its process patents.
According to NOCIL, it developed an industrially applicable invention around 2012 involving a novel process and method for producing 4-ADPA.
The chemical is used as an antioxidant in rubber and polymer applications and also serves as an intermediate in manufacturing other antioxidants.
NOCIL submitted that it subsequently improved the efficiency and other important characteristics of 4-ADPA. The company maintained that it had secured patent registrations granting it exclusive rights to use and commercially exploit the protected invention.
Finorchem Questions Patent Validity
Opposing the application, Finorchem argued that the mere registration of a patent does not, by itself, establish its prima facie validity under the Patents Act, 1970.
The submission challenged NOCIL’s reliance on its registered patents as a basis for securing interim protection.
High Court Finds Grounds for Interim Relief
After considering the rival submissions, Justice Kapur concluded that NOCIL had demonstrated sufficient grounds for interim protection.
The Court found that the company had established a strong prima facie case and that the balance of convenience supported granting the injunction.
It further observed that NOCIL would suffer irreparable injury if interim protection were denied.
Accordingly, the High Court granted an interim injunction in favour of NOCIL in the proceedings against Finorchem and the former employee.
