The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) has held that it has the power to review its own orders. It was noted that if the litigant had the right of review before the High Court either in appeal or in application, when the appeals were transferred to the IPAB, it cannot be taken away by the Board. It was noted that for the purpose of dispute resolving power and procedure, the IPAB is a substitute for the High Court.
The Board also held that Section 92 (1) of the Trade Marks Act gives wide and unambiguous power to the IPAB to regulate its own procedure and that they need not be bound by the procedure laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure. It was further noted that words “any other matter” in Section 92(2) cannot be construed to exclude the power of review as “powers of review” are not different from those powers mentioned in Section 92 (2) (a) to (c).
The IPAB, noting that C.P.C. provides for the right to file a review to a person aggrieved by an order from which no appeal is allowed, also held that when there is no right of appeal, the power of review must be held to be implied. In this regard, it was noted that there is no express bar for review and further Rule 23 would become meaningless if it is held otherwise.
Further, the Board was of the view that once the power of review is found and is implied in the statute, then whether the orders passed are interim orders or final or decision or judgment is not material. It held that this power to review is not limited to procedural errors but extends to substantive review but cannot extend to rehearing of the matter. [Aachi Masala Foods (P) Ltd. v. S.D. Murali – IPAB Order No. 147 of 2013, dated 8-7-2013]