KAVITHA KURUGANTI Vs. PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard Sri Colin Gonsalves, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. Niranjan Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for the first respondent, we find that the controversy surviving in the above case is very narrow.

(2.) The first respondent applied for registration under the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 [Hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'], describing FL 2027 as a new variety seed with the date of first commercial sale indicated to be 17/12/2009; based on an Assignment Deed dtd. 26/9/2003 by the original breeder, to a company in the United States of America, which is an affiliate of the first respondent.

(3.) The petitioner herein, canvassing the rights of individual farmers, approached the authority for a revocation under Sec. 34 of the Act. The revocation order passed was challenged by the first respondent before the High Court in an appeal, as provided under the Act. The learned Single Judge held in favour of the first respondent in certain aspects and sustained the revocation order on some other aspects. Both the petitioner and the first respondent filed appeals before the High Court. A common judgment passed is impugned before us.