Insights

Case notes

Short, neutral summaries of Indian judgments that matter to businesses: intellectual property, investment, corporate governance and privacy. Each note sets out the issue, what the court held and why it matters in practice.

Law library with shelves of bound law reports and a reading lamp

About these notesThese notes summarise reported judgments for general information. They do not suggest that Trilegient was involved in any of these cases. Always read the full judgment before relying on it.

Intellectual property

Novartis AG v Union of India

(2013) 6 SCC 1 · Supreme Court of India · 1 April 2013

Issue: Whether the beta crystalline form of imatinib mesylate, a known substance, was patentable under Section 3(d) of the Patents Act, 1970.
Held: The Court refused the patent. For medicines, "efficacy" in Section 3(d) means therapeutic efficacy, and improved physical properties such as better flow or stability did not show enhanced therapeutic efficacy.
Why it matters: Section 3(d) is a real hurdle for incremental pharmaceutical inventions in India. Applicants should plan the evidence of therapeutic advantage when drafting, not at the objection stage.

Privacy

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) v Union of India

(2017) 10 SCC 1 · Supreme Court (nine judges) · 24 August 2017

Issue: Whether the Constitution of India protects a fundamental right to privacy.
Held: Privacy is a fundamental right, protected as part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and the freedoms in Part III. Restrictions must satisfy legality, legitimate aim and proportionality.
Why it matters: The judgment is the constitutional foundation for India's data protection framework, culminating in the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.

Investment and tax

Vodafone International Holdings BV v Union of India

(2012) 6 SCC 613 · Supreme Court of India · 20 January 2012

Issue: Whether the transfer of shares in an offshore company, which indirectly held Indian assets, was taxable in India.
Held: The Court held that the transaction was not taxable in India under the law as it then stood, and looked at the transaction as a whole rather than dissecting it.
Why it matters: Parliament amended the law retrospectively in 2012. The Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021 later withdrew retrospective demands for transfers before 28 May 2012. Indirect transfers remain a key tax diligence point for offshore structures.

Corporate

V.B. Rangaraj v V.B. Gopalakrishnan

(1992) 1 SCC 160 · Supreme Court of India

Issue: Whether a restriction on the transfer of shares agreed between shareholders, but not contained in the articles of association, binds the company and its shareholders.
Held: A restriction on transfer that is not in the articles of association is not binding on the company or its shareholders.
Why it matters: Shareholders' agreement terms on transfer should be written into the articles. Section 58(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 now recognises contracts on the transfer of securities of public companies, but aligning the articles remains standard practice.

Learning by example

Illustrative scenarios

These are invented examples, written to show how Indian rules apply to common cross-border situations. They are not client matters and do not describe any real person or company.

Hypothetical scenario

A US software company protecting its brand in India

Situation: A Delaware company selling a SaaS product to Indian customers finds a local reseller has registered a similar domain and is using a close variant of its name.
Typical approach: Search the Indian register; file national applications in the key classes rather than relying only on a Madrid designation; gather evidence of Indian reputation and use; consider a passing-off action and a domain name complaint in parallel.

Hypothetical scenario

A Chinese manufacturer forming a joint venture

Situation: A manufacturer based in China plans a 49% stake in a joint venture with an Indian component maker.
Typical approach: Because the investor is from a country sharing a land border with India, government approval under Press Note 3 is needed whatever the sector. Build approval into the timetable, make the shareholders' agreement conditional on it, and mirror the transfer and exit terms in the articles.

Hypothetical scenario

A UK fintech building a research team in India

Situation: A London fintech wants a team in India to track regulatory changes and maintain its compliance knowledge base.
Typical approach: Start with a four-week pilot on one market, agree the sources, review checklist and turnaround, keep data on the client's own systems, then scale to a dedicated team with weekly quality reporting.