Interim Injunctions in Delhi Patent Suits: Grant Rate
What a Delhi High Court judge actually weighs when a patentee asks for an interim injunction, why the grant rate cannot be read as one simple number, and how to measure it honestly. Last verified October 2026.
Explainer · Patent Litigation Data
A patent owner who files a suit in Delhi usually wants one thing first: an interim injunction that stops the infringer before the trial ends. A defendant wants to know how likely that is. People often ask for a single grant rate, but the honest answer depends on how you count, which suits you include, and what stage you measure. This explainer sets out the legal test, why patent injunctions are decided differently from trademark ones, and the exact way a grant rate should be reported before anyone quotes it.
- The test: prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable harm, under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC and Wander v Antox (1990).
- Why patents are harder: validity can be challenged from day one, so courts are careful.
- How to quote a grant rate: always with N suits, the date range, the definition of a grant, and the test date.
- Last verified: October 2026.
01Why one grant rate misleads
A grant rate sounds simple: out of all patent suits where an interim injunction was asked for, how many got one? In practice, the number can swing widely depending on the choices behind it.
What counts as a grant
Courts rarely give a clean yes or no on day one. Many suits end in an ex parte ad interim order, a status quo order, an undertaking by the defendant, or a settlement before the application is argued. Each of these is different from a reasoned injunction after a full hearing. If a study counts them all as grants, the rate looks high. If it counts only reasoned orders, the rate looks low.
Which suits are in the pool
Patent suits in pharma, telecom, and mechanical technology behave differently. A pool dominated by one sector will show that sector’s habits. A rate that does not say what it includes cannot be compared with another rate.
When you measure
A suit may be open for years. An application filed last month has no outcome yet. Any grant rate must say whether pending applications are left out, and as of which date.
A grant rate is only useful when it comes with the number of suits behind it, the date it was measured, and a clear rule for what counts as a grant.
Related data
For a wider look at the same court and the same technology fields, see our pharma patent litigation dataset.
02The legal test for an interim injunction
An interim injunction in India is decided on the classic three-part test: a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable harm if relief is refused.
The procedural home for this is Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Supreme Court laid out the working principles in Wander Ltd v Antox India P Ltd, 1990 Supp SCC 727, decided on 26 April 1990. That case also reminds courts that interim relief is meant to protect the plaintiff from harm that damages cannot repair, while weighing the defendant’s right to carry on its business.
- Prima facie case: the patentee must show a serious question on infringement and on the validity of the patent.
- Balance of convenience: who suffers more if the injunction is granted or refused, for example an essential medicine going off the market.
- Irreparable harm: whether money at the end of trial can really make up for what is lost, such as price erosion or lost market share.
The Patents Act, 1970 also allows an injunction as relief in an infringement suit (Section 108).
Suits that do not seek urgent interim relief must first go through pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The Supreme Court held this mandatory in Patil Automation v Rakheja Engineers (2022), applying prospectively to suits filed on or after 20 August 2022. A patentee who pleads real urgency can go straight to court.
03Why patents are harder than trademarks
Patent injunctions are usually harder to get than trademark injunctions, because a patent’s validity is open to attack from the first day of the suit.
In a trademark or passing off case, the court can often compare two marks and form a view quickly. A patent case needs the court to read claims, understand the technology, and decide whether the patent is likely to survive a challenge. A defendant can raise grounds of revocation as a defence and may also file a counterclaim for revocation. That puts validity in doubt, and courts are slower to restrain a defendant when a credible challenge is on the table.
The credible challenge problem
The usual argument for the defendant is that the patent has a real vulnerability, such as lack of novelty or inventive step, or a prior publication. If the defendant raises a serious doubt, the court often declines an interim injunction and may order accounts or a deposit instead, leaving the real fight for trial.
Strength of the grant itself
A patent that has survived pre-grant and post-grant opposition, or has been upheld before, starts from a stronger place than a freshly granted one. Courts also look at whether the patent is being worked and whether the patentee delayed in suing.
04What decides the outcome in Delhi
In practice, a handful of facts tend to separate suits where relief is given from suits where it is refused.
- Speed of filing: a long gap between learning of the product and filing a suit weakens the claim of irreparable harm.
- Validity history: earlier court findings or opposition outcomes on the same patent carry real weight.
- Clarity of infringement: a plain claim chart, with each element mapped to the defendant’s product, helps the court act early.
- Public interest: for medicines and medical devices, the court looks hard at availability and price to patients.
- Conduct: full disclosure, clean pleadings, and a reasonable offer on undertakings or security shape how the judge views the case.
The Delhi High Court hears these matters in its Intellectual Property Division, which handles patents, trademarks, designs, and related IP work. For how a university or institutional patent can be affected before it ever reaches court, see our report on university patent lapses.
05How to measure a grant rate honestly
A usable grant rate states five things alongside the number: the sample size, the date range, the definition of a grant, how pending matters were treated, and the date of the last check.
| What to state | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| N (number of suits) | A rate from a small sample can change sharply with one more order. |
| Date range and test date | Courts change habits over time. A rate has no meaning without the dates. |
| Definition of a grant | Reasoned injunction, ad interim order, status quo, and undertaking are different outcomes. |
| Pending matters | Leaving them out can overstate or understate the true rate. |
| Sector split | Pharma, telecom, and mechanical suits can differ a lot. |
Claw’s own figure is published only in this form: the share of patent suits in the Delhi High Court IP Division where an interim injunction was granted, with the number of suits (N) and the date the dataset was last checked. We do not quote a bare percentage.
Court orders can be read directly on the Delhi High Court website and on Indian Kanoon. A careful reader can check any rate against these orders.
06What to do with this as a litigant
The practical lesson is to prepare for the validity fight before you file, not after.
If you are a patentee
File quickly, keep a clean record of the patent’s history including any oppositions, build a clear infringement chart, and be ready with evidence of harm that money cannot fix. Check the patent’s renewal status first, because a lapsed patent undermines a suit at the outset.
If you are a defendant
Put the strongest invalidity ground in front of the court at the first hearing, with prior art ready. Show the public-interest or hardship side of an injunction, and consider offering an accounts undertaking as a middle path.
If you advise either side
Do not rely on a bare grant rate to predict a result. Use it to set the starting expectation, then judge the case on its own validity record. For tools that help teams run this research, see the best pharma IP software in India.
07Where Claw fits
Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals.
An honest grant rate is built from the underlying orders, suit by suit, and that is exactly what Claw lets you pull. Claw tracks cases, orders and hearings across 9,102 courts, benches and forums, searches 30 crore+ judgments with results in under 5 seconds, and covers the Supreme Court from 1950 and the High Courts from 1990. So you can read the Delhi High Court interim orders behind a figure, follow a live patent suit by party or advocate name, and check how a bench has weighed the three part test in similar matters.
Claw does not use customer documents to train AI models. Create a FREE Claw account to track patent suits and research interim orders by party or advocate name. To search the wider body of law, see case search across Indian courts.
08Sources and further reading
Primary sources for the points above:
- Wander Ltd v Antox India P Ltd (1990): Indian Kanoon
- Patil Automation v Rakheja Engineers (2022): Indian Kanoon
- Delhi High Court: delhihighcourt.nic.in
- Patent Office (IP India): ipindia.gov.in
- Claw: clawlaw.in
Last verified October 2026. This is general information, not legal advice.
09Frequently asked questions
How often are interim injunctions granted in patent suits in India?
There is no single reliable number. The rate depends on how a grant is defined, which suits are counted, and the date measured. Any figure should be published with the number of suits and the test date. Patent injunctions are generally harder to get than trademark ones because validity can be challenged at once.
What is the test for an interim injunction in a patent suit?
The court looks for a prima facie case, a balance of convenience in the plaintiff’s favour, and irreparable harm if relief is refused. These principles are applied under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC and were set out in Wander Ltd v Antox India (1990).
Why do courts refuse interim injunctions in patent cases?
The most common reason is a credible challenge to the patent’s validity. Delay in filing, public interest in medicines, and weak infringement evidence also count. Courts may order accounts or a deposit instead.
Do I have to try mediation before a patent suit in Delhi?
Under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, pre-institution mediation is mandatory unless the suit contemplates urgent interim relief. The Supreme Court confirmed this in Patil Automation v Rakheja Engineers (2022), applying it to suits filed on or after 20 August 2022.
Where can I check Delhi patent orders myself?
You can read orders on the Delhi High Court website and on Indian Kanoon. Claw also tracks Delhi High Court IP Division matters and orders, and covers over 30 crore judgments for research.
Does Claw track copyright registrations?
No. For copyright, Claw is court-side only and does not track the Copyright Office registry. For trademarks, patents, designs, and GIs, it tracks IP India registry matters alongside court litigation.