Under Rule 62 of the Patent Rules, 2003, after receiving the recommendations of the Opposition Board or at any other time as he deems appropriate, the Controller of Patents shall schedule a hearing between the Patentee and the Opponent, with the members of the Opposition Board compulsorily present therein. In addition, he must give the parties a notice of not less than ten days before the hearing, in which all the declarations and proofs made by the parties involved will be discussed.
In accordance with sub-rule (2) of Rule 62, any party desirous of being heard shall on payment of requisite fees, give notice to the Controller for the same. The Controller reserves the right to deny the right to be heard to any party who has not filed the aforementioned notice.
Should either of the parties intend to rely on any publications during the hearing that have not been previously mentioned in the notice, statement or evidence, they must notify the Controller and the opposite party along with the description of such publication, not less than five days in advance.
After hearing both parties or without holding a hearing if neither party requests to be heard, and taking into account the recommendations of the Opposition Board, the Controller shall determine the outcome of the Opposition Notice by ordering the maintenance, revocation or amendment of the Patent. He must additionally notify the parties of this decision.
Either of the parties can appeal against the decision of the Controller. Formerly, the IPAB would entertain these appeals. However, now that it has been abolished, any such requests may be filed with the High Court within three months of receiving notice of the Controller’s judgment.
In the case of pre-grant opposition, there is no explicit provision for the opponent to be heard. He has the opportunity to file a request for a hearing; however, the grant of such a request is solely at the discretion of the Controller and is based on the merit of the opposition. Furthermore, the rules do not specify the manner of conduct of the hearing. In contrast, the opponent in the case of a post-grant opposition may proceed with the hearing regardless of the merit of the notice of opposition.