Recently Delhi High Court, quashed and set aside the order of the Assistant controller of Patents and Designs refusing application for registration of patent of Dolby International AB. Hon’ble C. Harishankar J. came very heavily on the Assistant Controller of Patents and observed that the impugned order, to say the least, most unsatisfactorily drawn up, it is hardly possible to treat it as written or drafted. The Hon’ble judge has pasted the impugned order in his order to show his anguish about the impugned order. Further, the court has deconstructed the order to understand the reasoning given behind the refusal of patent application. However, the Hon’ble court was not in a position to decipher the order. Further, the Hon’ble court opined that “it would well for the officers in the office of the Controller of Patents and Designs, who are discharging such functions, to bear in mind the fact that grant or rejection of a patent is a serious matter. A patent is meant to be a recognition of the innovative step that has been put into a crafting of an invention. Inventions increment the state of existing scientific knowledge and, thereafter, are of inestimable public interest. Any decision, whether to grant or refuse a patent has, therefore, to be informed by due application of mind, which must be reflected in the decision. Orders refusing applications for grant of a patent cannot be mechanically passed, as has been done in the present case”.