Patent: Definition and Meaning

•‘Patent’ [s. 2(1)(m)] means a patent for any invention granted under this Act

•Invention [s. 2(1)(j)] means 

–a new product or process 

–involving an inventive step 

–and capable of industrial application 

•Inventive step [s. 2(1)(ja)] means a feature of an invention 

–That involves technical advance 

–as compared to the existing knowledge or 

–Having economic significance 

–Or both and 

–That makes the invention not obvious to a person skilled in the art 

•Capable of industrial application [s. 2(1)(ac)] in relation to an invention 

–means that the invention is capable of being made or used in an industry 

 

•Patentee [s. 2(1)(p)] means the person for the time being entered on the register as the grantee or proprietor of the patent 

Invention

•Not necessary that the product developed should be totally new product 

•Even if product substantially improved by an inventive step, will be an invention 

•Bishwanath Prasad Radhey Shyam v. Hindustan Metal Industries, (1979) 2 SCC 511 

–Whether an alleged invention involved novelty and an ‘inventive step’ was a mixed question of law and fact and depends largely on the circumstances of the case 

 

–‘manner of manufacture’ if publicly known, used and practiced in the country, then there’s no novelty 

 

•‘new invention’ [s. 2(1)(l)]means 

–Any invention or technology 

–Which has not been anticipated 

–By publication in any document 

–Or used in the country or elsewhere in the world 

–Before the date of filing of patent application with complete specification i.e. 

–The subject matter has not fallen in public domain 

–Or that it does not form part of the state of the art 

•New or novel 

–Bishwanath Prasad Radhey Shyam v. Hindustan Metal Industries, (1979) 2 SCC 511 

–Househill Coal and Iron Company v Neilson, (1843) 1 Web PC 673 

–British Vacuum Cleaner Co Ltd v. Suction Cleaners Ltd., (1904) 21 RPC 303 

•Inventive Step 

–Technical advance as compared to existing knowledge or having economic significance or both  

–Bajaj Auto Ltd v. TVS Motor Co Ltd, (2008) 36 PTC 417 (Mad) 

–Dhanpat Seth & Others v Nil Kamal Plastic Crates Ltd, (2008) 36 PTC 123 (HP) (DB) 

•New product is just an imitation of traditional Kilta 

•Mere fact that device is made of polymeric material instead of bamboo not an inventive step

•Prior public knowledge 

–Could be by word of mouth or 

–By publication through books or other media 

 

•Non-obviousness 

–If there is no inventive step, it implies that it is obvious- Bilcare Ltd v. Amartara Pvt Ltd (2007) 34 PTC 419 (Del) 

•Product Patent and Process Patent 

–Before Amendment Act 2005,in respect of food, drugs and pharmaceuticals, only process patent was granted 

•Patentee 

–‘Firm’ does not have the capacity to invent 

•But still could be registered either by assignment or jointly with the inventor 

•Corporation can’t be the sole applicant claiming to be the inventor