Innovatech Pharma Pvt. Ltd., a registered Indian pharmaceutical company, was granted a patent in 2018 for its drug 'Painexol', used to treat chronic pain. In 2020, Innovatech developed an improved formula for Painexol th

CS Executive · Economic, Commercial and Intellectual Property Laws · PYQS · December 2025
Innovatech Pharma Pvt. Ltd., a registered Indian pharmaceutical company, was granted a patent in 2018 for its drug 'Painexol', used to treat chronic pain. In 2020, Innovatech developed an improved formula for Painexol that reduced its side effects and filed a patent of addition for this improvement. By 2022, Elixir BioCare Ltd., a competing pharmaceutical company, approached the Controller of Patents seeking a compulsory licence to manufacture and distribute a generic version of Painexol in India. Meanwhile, Innovatech failed to pay the patent renewal fees for 2023, attributing the oversight to clerical errors during financial restructuring. In March 2024, Innovatech applied for the restoration of the lapsed patent. Elixir BioCare opposed this application, citing the delay and lack of bona fide intention and simultaneously began selling generic Painexol even before receiving a compulsory licence. In view of the above case, answer the following questions: What is the procedure to be followed for the disposal of Innovatech's application for restoration under Section 61 of the Indian Patents Act ?

Answer & Explanation:

Section 61 of the Patents Act, 1970, provides that if, after hearing the applicant in cases where the applicant so desires or the Controller thinks fit, the Controller is prima facie satisfied that the failure to pay the renewal fee was unintentional and that there has been no undue delay in the making of the application, he shall publish the application in the prescribed manner; and within the prescribed period, any person interested may give notice to the Controller of opposition thereto on either or both of the following grounds that- the failure to pay the renewal fee was not unintentional; or there has been undue delay in the making of the application. If notice of opposition is given within the prescribed period aforesaid, the Controller shall notify the applicant, and shall give to him and to the opponent an opportunity to be heard before deciding the case. If no notice of opposition is given within the prescribed period aforesaid or if in the case of opposition, the decision of the Controller is in favour of the applicant, the Controller shall, upon payment of any unpaid renewal fee and such additional fee as may be prescribed, restore the patent and any patent of addition specified in the application which has ceased to have effect on the cesser of that patent. The Controller may, if he thinks fit as a condition of restoring the patent, require that an entry shall be made in the register of any document or matter which has to be entered in the register but which has not been so entered.

Topics: Patents Act, 1970

Open in Interactive Practice Hub · Full Practice Hub · Chapter Weightage · More in this subject

Related Questions in this Topic