Journal of Intellectual Property Rights Vol 2 May 1997 pp 113-123

Patenting Activities in India: An Overview

KSKardam

Asstt Controller of Patents & Designs, Patent Office Branch, 3rd Floor, Municipal Marketing Building Karol Bagh, New Delhi 11()()()5

This paper gives an overview of the patenting activities in India. The Patents Act, 1970, its salient features, comparison with the Patents & Designs Act 1911 and post wro scenario are discussed in detail. In spite of the limitations of the Patents Act, 1970, it has provided much needed impetus not only to the R&D activities but also to industrial development of the country.

The patents have been considered to be an important tool in the economic and indus­trial development of the country which en­courage the inventors to evolve new inventions, offer a reward for the expenses of developing inventions to the stage at which they are commercially viable, provide inducement to invest capital in new lines of production which might not appear profit­able if many competing producers embark on them simultaneously and provide a steady flow of latest information on latest developments in various fields of science & technology. The patent system in India is based on the principles that (i) patents are granted to encourage inventors, (ij) pat­ented inventions are worked in India on commercial scale to the fullest extent, (iii) the patented inventions are commercially worked within reasonable time without un-

due delay, and (iv) the patents are not granted merely to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of patented articles.

The Patent system in India is not a new phenomenon but it dates back to mid nine­teenth century. The first Act relating to pat­ent rights was passed in 1856 which granted certain exclusive privileges to inventors of new manufacture for a period of 14 years. Later on three subsequent enactments of 1872, 1883 and 1888 were made and finally consolidated resulting into the Patents & Designs Act, 1911.

In 1949, the Government of India appointed the Patent Enquiry Committee (PEC) under the chairmanship of Justice Bakshi Tek Chand in order to ensure that patent system was conducive to national interest to achieve desired level of industrial and economic growth and also to ensure that patent mo-

114 ]. INTEllEC. PROP. RIGHTS, MAY 1997

nopoly was not abused to the prejudice of l. The provisions defining very precisely trade or industrial development or the con- as to what are not inventions and what sumer. The committee submitted its report are not patentable inventions. in 1950 suggesting certain provisions for 2. The provisions under which substance compulsory licensing with a view to counter- capable of being used as food or as acting the misuse or abuse of patent monop- dmg or medicine, substance produced olies. by chemical process, alloys, optical Subs~quently in 1957 the Government of glass, semiconductors and inter metal-India appointed justice N Rajagopalan Ayy- lie compounds have been excluded anager to review the patent law in Tndia. from patentability. However processes Justice Ayyanger while recommending the for their manufacture have been made retention of patent system despite its short- patentable. comings in its application to an underdevel- 3. Inventions relating to atomic energy oped country like India, made the following falling within the subsection (1) of se<:-remarks: tion 20 of the Atomic Energy Act, 1962

'''The patent system is the most desirable have been excluded from patentability. method of encouraging inventors and re-warding them and though at present In- 4. The provisions have been provided for dian inventors take a very small share in protecting public interest under which the benefits of that system, with the in- patented articles can be !pade or im-creasing emphasis on technical educa- ported and also the patented processes tion and the number and quality of the can be used by the government or research institutes that have been estab- authorized persons for its own use. lished in the country together with rapid Similarly the patented dmgs can be industrialization, one may look forward to imported by the government for its a time when the Indian research worker own use or for their distribution in any and inventor will take full advantage of the dispensary, hospital or other medical patent law." institution maintained by the Govern-

On the basis of this report, the Patent Bill ment.

1965 was moved in the Parliament which 5. In order to avoid abuse of monopoly

was passed on 29 August 1970 and ultimately granted to the patentee, the provisions

became the Eatents Act, 1970 with the objec- of compulsory license and license of

tives of promoting research and inventions, rights have been provided. The en-

accelerating industrial growth in the country dorsement of the patents with the word

and preventing exploitation of a monopoly 'license of right' in fact is an invitation position through a well regulated patent sys- to the interested persons to seek li-

tem. censes to exploit the patented inven-ti on commercially to meet the

Salient features of the Patents Act, reasonable requirements of the public and to make them available to the pub-

1970 lie at reasonable prices.

The salient features of the Patents Act, 1970 6. Term of the patent in respect of the

are: inventions relating to food, drug or

KARDAM: PATENTING ACfMTIES IN INDIA 115

medicine reduced to 7 years from the date of patent and 5 years from the date of sealing whichever is earlier.

7. More effective provisions in order to provide strong protection against any infringement of patentee's rights.

Patents & Designs Act, 1911 v / s The Patents Act, 1970

(a) Drop in filing rate - When the Patents Act, 1970 came into force in 1972, there was a sudden and sharp drop in the filing rate of the applications for the grant of patents com­pared to the rate of filing of patent applica­tions under the Patents & Designs Act, 1911 which might be mainly due to change in the term of the patents in respect of food, drug or medicine, prohibition of product patent in respect thereof and also due to provisions for commercially working patented inventions in India failing which provisions of compul­

·sory license or license of rights would be attracted. These provisions might have made the foreign applicants less interested. This sudden fall in the filing rate can be seen from the tables-1 & 2 given below:

Table 1 - The number of applications filed during 1961-1970 under the

Patents & Designs Act, 1911

Year Indian Foreign Total

1961 706 4583 5289 1962 738 5075 5813 1963 754 4922 5676 1964 824 4881 5705 1965 878 5124 6002 1966 894 4535 5429 1967 1026 4164 5190 1968 1110 4248 5358 1969 1120 4326 5446 1970 1116 4026 5142

Table 2 - Number of applications filed during 1972-73 to 1981-82 un-

der the Patents Act, 1970

Year Indian Foreign Total

1972-73 1143 2496 3639

1973-74 976 2515 3491

1974-75 1148 2258 3406

1975-76 1129 1867 2996

1976-77 1342 1762 3104-

1977-78 1097 1773 2870

1978-79 1124 1808 2932

1979-80 1055 1925 2980-

1980-81 1159 1795 2954

1981-82 1093 1896 2989-

(b) Rise in applications filed by Indians - The implementation ofthe provisions un­der the Patents Act, 1970 compared to the provisions under the Patents & Designs Act, 1911 made the substantial rise in the number of applications filed by Indian applicants which can be noticed from the table 2 which again might be due to prohibition of grant of patents for the product per se in respect of chemical substance and substance capable of being used as food or as medicine or drug enabling the Indian inventors to develop al­ternative and economic process for the pro­duction of same product for the grant of patent.

Patenting Activities under The Patents Act, 1970

Rise in the patent applications - After sharp decline in the filing rate of the patent applications which continued upto 1982, there was an improvement in filing rate in next decade which caused steady rise in the

116 J. INTELLEC. PROP. RIGHTS, MAY 1997

number of applications. This rise might be attributed to either change in the thinking of foreign applicants in respect of repercussion of changes brought under the Patents Act, 1970 or change in economic policies which attracted the multinational companies to bring their technology which was not possi­ble without patent protection. However one of the main reasons could be restrictions provided under 1970 Act, for allowance of single invention in one application which led to filing of multiple applications, out of one application on the ground of plurality whereas under the Act of 1911, it was possi­ble to claim related inventions in single ap­plication. The table 3 shows the increase in the number of applications filed during 1982-83 to 1993-94.

Table 3 - Number of applications filed during 1982-83 to 1993-94

Year Indian Foreign Tot.al

1982-83 1135 1950 3085

1983-84 1055 2090 3145

1984-85 1001 2318 3319

1985-86 999 2527 3526

1986-87 983 2506 3489

1987-88 930 2527 3457

1988-89 1077 2521 3598

1989-90 1039 2622 3661

1990-91 1180 2584 3764

1991-92 1293 2559 3552

1992-93 1228 2239 3467

1993-94 1266 2603 3869

Fieldwise trend in the filing - The major­ity of the applications are filed in the chemi­cal field, the filing rate was 31% in 1986- 87 which has come down to 28% in 1993-94 but maintained an average of 32% during 1986-87

to 1993-94, followed by the applications filed in the mechanical engineering field i.e. 28% in 1986-87 which has decreased to 22% in 1993-94 but maintained an average of 26.6% during the same period. The filing rate in electrical engineering was 16% in 1986-87 which has comedown to 11% in 1993-94 but recorded an average of 13% during the same period. ]ne filing trend in the field of phar­maceutical is that its filing rate was 6% in 1986-87 and 7% in 1993-94 but recorded an average of 6.7% during 1986-87 to 1993-94. The contribution of the applications relating to food is 1% of total filing. The remaining is contributed by "General" field which in­cludes, metallurgy, civil engineering, textile & others. Similarly the electrical engineer­ing field also includes electronic & telecom­munication. This trend of filing is shown in table 4.

Major contributors in foreign filing -Major contirbutors to the patent applications in India are USA, UK, Germany, France, Swtizerland, Japan and USSR The contribu­tion of USA which was about 37% in 1984-85 has increased to about 44% in 1993-94. TIle number of applications from UK, France, Japan, has decreased slightly as compared to 1984-85. However the contribution of Ger­many has increased after the merger of West & East Germany. In a way, the Germany is second largest contributor to the total num­ber of foreign applications filed in India after USA However under the old Act of 1911 the contribution of applications from UK, was 524 in 1971 and 436 in 1972 which was de­creased by 50%. Surprisingly USSR's contri­bution has also decreased remarkably which was 58 applications in 1984-85, rose to 145 applications in 1988-89 and only 6 applica­tions in 1993-94. The decreased in contribu­tion from USSR is due to its disintegration. These figures are given in table 5.

KARDAM: PATENTING ACfIVITIES IN INDIA 117

Table 4 - Field-wise trend of applications from 1986-87 to 1993- 94

Year Chemical Drugs Food Electrical Mechanical General Total

1986-87 1112 214 34 577 972 579 3489

1987-88 1020 198 39 563 847 790 3457

1988-89 1191 221 21 419 974 772 3598

1989-90 1225 216 13 454 932 821 3661

1990-91 1297 258 41 492 1173 503 3764

1991-92 1185 323 38 468 994 544 3552

1992-93 1138 234 29 461 946 659 3467

1993-94 1122 273 82 426 859 1071 3869

Table 5 - Country-wise details of filing of patent applications

Year 1984-85 85-86 86-87 87-88 88-89 89-90 90- 91 91-92 92-93 93-94 Country

USA 862 968 857 950 969 1055 1130 1103 995 1136

UK 244 278 306 257 237 224 230 202 164 290 * * * * Germany 284 277 307 305 292 257 294 229 317 344

France 168 188 191 171 178 168 150 114 106 104

Japan 133 140 135 126 104 113 134 122 94 126

Switzerland 135 116 137 109 128 180 141 129 112 149 ** ** ** USSR 58 68 64 99 145 119 53 15 9 6

Others 434 492 509 510 468 506 452 645 442 529

Total 2318 2527 2506 2527 2521 2622 2584 2559 2239 2603 This includes total contribution of Gennany after merger of West & East Gennany

•• This includes total contribution of USSR after its disintegration

Field-wise grant of patents - It can be are granted patents in all fields except seen from the table 6 that out of the total chemicals where grant of patents compared grant about 30% of patents are granted in the to their filing is below 50%. One of the main field of mechanical engineering although reasons for not granting patents to all appli-the number of applications filed in the field cations is either non-pursuance of the appli-of chemicals are more. It can also be seen cations by the applicants i.e. they are not put that more than 90% of total applications filed in order for acceptance within stipulated pe-

118 J. INTELLEC. PROP. RIGHTS, MAY 1997

riod of time, or non compliance of filing of complete specification after filing the provi­sional specification. However very few num-

out undue delay, and the patents are not granted to enable the patentee to import the patented article. These provisions had been

Table 6 - Field-wise grant of patents

Year

1986-87

1987-88

1988-89

1989-90

1990-91

1991-92

1992-93

1993-94

Chemical Drug

474 185

731 124

704 300

389 146

339 87

474 118

318 94

436 145

Food Electrical

21 293

15 228

44 608

20 322

10 285

10 167

12 194

30 132

Mechanical General

705 448

489 517

1183 541

692 321

535 235

181 726

372 282

215 788

Total

2126

2104

3380

1890

1491

1676

1272

1746

ber of applications have been refused by the controller either under section 15 or 27 of the Patents Act, 1970. The details of field- wise grant of patents are given in table 6.

Table 7 - Number of patents granted to Indians & Foreigners

Grant of patents to foreigners - The patents granted to foreigners under the pre­sentAct of 1970 are 74% in 1993-94 compared to 82% in 1984-85. Thus the number of pat­ents granted to Indians are increasing as compared to foreigners. However the num­ber of patents granted to foreigners under the Patents & Designs Act, 1911 which was 92% In 1963 (3399/3678) and 91% (3889/4254) in 1964, was much higher than the patents granted under the Patents Act, 1970. In other words, the Patents Act, 1970 has encouraged the Indian inventors to file more applications for the grant of patents which has resulted in securing more grant of patents. The details of grant of patents to Indian and foreigners are given in table 7.

Commercial working - The inventions are worked in India on a commercial scale within reasonably practicable time i.e. with-

Year

1984-85

1985-86

1986-87

1987-88

1988-89

1989-90

1990-91

1991-92

1992-93

1993-94

Indian Foreign

263 1206

451 1500

532 1594

588 1516

795 2585

519 1371

379 1112

551 1125

251 1021

442 1304

Total

1469

1951

2126

2104

3380

1890

1491

1676

1272-

1746

incorporated with a view to stimulating the industrial growth thereby paving the way for rapid industrial development of the country. In order to monitor these provisions, certain provisions have been made under section 146 under which the controller has the

KARDAM: PATENTING ACfMTIES IN INDIA 119

Table 8 - Number of patents worked during 1985-93

Year Chemical Mechanical and Electrical Total

1985 86 1986 107 1987 151 1988 155 1989 64 1990 80 1991 93 1992 63 1993 180

power to call for information regarding their commercial working in India. Further under section 146(2) it has been made mandatory on the part of patentee to furnish the state­ment every year as to the extent to which the patented invention has been commercially worked in India. The table 8 shows the num­ber of patents worked on commercial scale during the period 1985-93 based on the state­ments received from the patentees under section 146(2) during the respective year.

It can be inferred from the table that out of total patents which have worked on com­mercial scale during 1985-1993, 24.7% be­long to chemical which also includes drug, medicine & food, 57.9% belong to mechani­cal which also includes general field and 17% belong to electrical which also includes, electronics and telecommunication. How­ever, on an average, out of total patents granted during 1985-93, 20% patents are stated to have worked on commercial scale. These figures are based on the statement received from the patentees but actual fig­ures for commercially working patents could be much less, only 1 to 5% of total grant. Difference between number of pat­ents actually worked and number of patents stated to have been worked as per informa-

General 169 70 325 395 102 604 318 89 558 301 118 574 172 53 289 134 38 252 210 40 343 156 52 271 440 122 742

tion supplied by patentee is due to non exist­ence of any mechanism under the Patents Act, 1970 to physically verify the veracity of their statements.

Compulsory licensing & license of Right

The non working of the patented inventions amount to an abuse of the exclusive rights granted to the patentee either by meeting the demand of the patented articles by im­portation from abroad or by refusing to grant license to work the patented invention by a person other than patentee. In order to avoid such abuse, the provisions of compulsory licensing & license of rights have been pro­vided under the Patents Act, 1970 which can be invoked on the ground that the reason­able requirements of the public have not been satisfied or that the patented invention is not available to the public at a reasonable price. The table 9 shows the trend in invok­ing these provisions during the last 10 years i.e. 1983-1984 to 1993-1994.

From the table 9 it can be seen that consid­ering the number of patents which have not been worked on commercial scale and num­ber of patents which have been endorsed

120 J. INTEllEC. PROP. RIGHTS, MAY 1997

Table 9 - Statement showing the trend in compulsory licensing & license of rights and non worked.

patents

Year No of No of No of applications patents patents

filed for endorsed not compulsory with worked

license license of right

1975-76 2 N/A N/A 1983-84 5 97 3699 1984-85 10 55 1895 1985-86 5 55 2524 1986-87 Nil 60 1343

1987-88 Nil 47 3183 1988-89 1 155 2627 1989-90 Nil 198 3102 1991-91 Nil 536 1416

1991-92 Nil 787 1763 1992-93 Nil 922 1683 1993-94 Nil 257 1992

with license of rights during the period of 1983-1984 to 1993-1994, number of applica­tions filed for the grant of ~ompulsory li­censes are negligible. For, in J975-76 two applications for the grant of compulsOlY li­censes were pending at the beginning of the year. Out of two, the compulsory license was granted in respect of one application and other one was refused . Later on, same licen­see applied under section 93(4) of the Act, for the grant of license on two more patents held by the same patentee, on which license was already granted under section 84 to other person. However, in addition to that, these licenses were also granted. Similarly in 1983-84 only 5 applications, 10 applica­tions in 1984-85 and 5 applications in 1985-86 were filed. Out of 20 applications, 5 applica-

tions were settled by parties on mutual agreements and remaining 15 had been withdrawn later on in 19~9 as the term of patent in respect of these applications had expired therefore parties had shown no in­terest.

It can be inferred that provisions of compul­sory licensing and license of right embodied in the Patents Act 1970 in order to prevent abuse of monopolistic rights, appear to have been ineffective. The reasons why these pro­visions are ineffective might be due to (i) lengthy and costly procedure for its applica­tion, (ii) tack of necessary technical "know­how" or its non-availability from the patentee to facilitate the working of the invention by licensee, (iii) absence of any legal sanction in the Patents Act, 1970 compelling the pat­entee to provide necessary "Knowhow". Due to these reasons, applications for compul­sory licensing are either not filed or if filed, they are negligible.

Post wro (GATT) Scenario

Uruguay Round of GAIT negotitions which started in 1986 at Punta Del Este (Uruguay) and concluded on 15 December 1993 after intense & acrimonious negotiat ion s throughout its discussion included within its framework the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) . The signing of this agreement by the representatives of about 117 countries at Marrakesh on 15 April 1994 led to the formation of World Trade Organi­zation (\VTO) replacing the GATT. The wro came into existence with effect from 1 January 1995. The agreement on TRIPS pro­vided certain norms and standards for cer­tain areas of intellectual property rights -(1) Patents (2) Trademarks (3) Industrial Designs (4) Copyrights (5) Integrated cir­cuits (6) Geographical indications and (7) Trade secrets (undisclosed information) . In

KARDAM: PATENTING ACfMTIES IN INDIA 121

the area of patents, following provisions have been provided:-

(1) Protection to the inventions in all fields of technology whether products or processes if they meet the require­ments of newness, non-obviousness, and industrial application.

(2) Protection to microoganisms and mi­crobiological processes except essen­tially biological process.

(3) Protection of plant varieties either by patents or by an effective sui generis system or by any combination thereof.

(4) Importation of patented products to be treated equivalent to commercial ex­ploitation (working) of patents in the country.

(5) Enhancement of term of patent for 20 years for all inventions unlike under the Patents Act, 1970 which provides 7 years for food, drug or medicine and 14 years for others.

(6) Stringent conditions for the grant of compulsory license to be considered on the merit of each case.

(7) Provisions for the grant of Exclusive Marketing Rights (ERMS) for five years or until a product patent is granted by the country where patent protection for pharmaceutical and ag­rochemical product is not granted whichever is less.

(8) Transition period of one year for devel­oped country, 5 years for developing country and 10 years for least devel­oped country for implementation of these provisions. However, additional period of five years has been provided for those developing countries which do not allow the grant of product pat­ent.

(9) Formation of council for TRIPS to monitor the operation of this agree­ment and dispute settlement body.

In pursuance of obligations under TRIPS agreement, the Patents (Amendment) Ordi­nance 1994 was issued on 31 December 1994, which amended the provisions of Sec­tion 5 of The Patents Act, 1970 in order to facilitate the applicants to file patent applica­tions for the grant of product patents for pharmaceutical and agrochemicals. Later on, the said ordinance was replaced by Pat­ents (Amendment) Bill 1995 in order to pro­vide legal effect, which was passed by Lok Sabha in 1995, however as the same could not be passed in Rajya Sabha, the Bill has lapsed. Besides this, India has declared 72 more countries as a "convention" country in addition to Australia, Canada, Ireland, UK, Srilanka and New Zealand vide gazette noti­fication dated 3 January, 1995 which allows the applicants of said countries to claim pri­ority date in India enabling them to file their patent application within one year from the date of filing of said application in their own countries. The names of such convention countries are given in table 10.

Filing Trend of Patent Applications -The rate of filing of applications has in­creased because of the Patents (Amendment) Bill 1995. The filing details of patent applications in the year 1994-95, 1995-96 after TRIPS agreement are given in table 11.

The number of patent applications filed which was 3869 in 1993-94 has increased to 5330 in 1994-95 and has further increased to 7037 in 1995-96. Therefore as compared to 1993-94, the filing rate has increased to 38% in 1994-95 and in 1995-96 to 81.88% but com­pared to 1994-95 it has increased to 32%. This increase in filing of patent applications can be attributed to facilitating provisions in the

122 J. INTEllEC. PROP. RIGHTS, MAY 1997

Table 10 - List of Convention Countries (78)

Antigua Colombia Guyana

Argentina Costa Rica Honduras Australia Austria Cote D' HongKong

Ivoire Bahrain Czech Hungary

Repub. Bangladesh Denmark Iceland Barbados Dominica Indonesia

Repub. Ireland Belgium Finland Italy Belize France Japan Botswana Gabon Kenya Brazil Germany Korea Brunei Dar Ghana Kuwait Canada Chile Greece Lesotho

Table 11 _ . Number of applications filed after TRIPS agreement

Year No of applications

1994-95 533:0

1995-96 703:7

Indian Foreign

1741

N/A

3589

N/A

Patent (Amendment) Bill 1995 for filing the patent applications for the grant of product patent/exclusive marketing rights. How­ever number of filing of patent applications will continue to increase despite of pendency of Patents (Amendment) Bill in view of the facts that the provisions of the Bill, which will be passed in dlue course, is likely to be im­plemented with reetrospective effect

Conclusion

The Patents Act, 1970 in spite of its certain limitations has provided much needed impe­tus not only to the research & development activities but also to industrial development

Luxemburg

Macau

Malaysia

Malta

Mauritania Mauritius

Mexico Morocco Myanmar Namibia Netherlands New Zealand Nigeria

Norway

Pakistan

Paraguay

Peru

Philippines Portugal

Romania Senegal Singapore Slovak Republic South Africa

Spain Sri Lanka

St. Lucia

St. Vincent

Suriname

Switzerland

Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK USA Uruguay Venezuela

Zambia

of the country. Thus in a way, it has achieved the objectives which were set to be achieved on its implementation. For, pharmaceutical sector has recorded a turn over of about Rs 1,320 crore in bulk drug and Rs 6900 crore in formulation in 1993-94. The number of pharmaceutical units has increased to 16,000 in 1993-94 from2257 in 1969-70. Simi­larly investment has also increased from Rs 225 crone in 1973 to Rs 1060 crore in 1993. The R&D expenditure in this field which was Rs 10.50 crore in 1976- 77 has also in­creased to Rs 104 crore in 1993-94. Infact, India is currently a world leader in the manu­facture and export of basic drugs such alS

Ethambutol and Ibuprofen. The industry has also contributed to the development of new drugs such as Tromovill, Cibenid and Cent­bucridines as well as to the development of innovative process technologies for known drugs. Thus, the Patents Act, 1970 is directly responsible for the tremendous growth of pharmaceutical industry, which has made the country self sufficient in this field . How-

KARDAM: PATENTING ACTIVITIES IN INDIA 123

ever India's share in the world market is 0.53% in the case of export and 0.61% in the case of import thereby securing 33rd and 30th position respectively in spite of India having higher skilled labour (64.86%) com­pared to Brazil (43.43%), Thailand (47%), South Korea (59.29%), Canada (49.06%), USA (43.44%), Japan (61.94%), Germany (50.00%), France (42.90%) and Netherlands (54.49%). The enormous advances made by pharmaceutical industry under existing pat­ent law which prohibits product patent will not be lost once the provisions of TRIPS agreement are implemented in view of the fact that many of the patented drugs will be off patent by then. To accelerate the growth of Indian industry, expenditure on R&D activities will have to be increased which is 0.919% of total GDP compared to South Ko­re a (1.631%), Canada, (1.316%), USA (2.658%),Japan (2.852%), Germany (2.791%), France (2.308%), and Netherlands (2.321%). In India, out of the total R&D expenditure, 73.6% is public funded comp<lf(-d to South Korea (19.00%), Canada (52%), USA (28.90%), Japan (37%), Germany (29%), U.K (39%), and Netherlands (41.74%). However, according to a recent study by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Com­merce and Industry (FICC!) , the Indian pharmaceutical sector has nothing to fear from the intellectual property right regime as already 85 to 95% of essential drugs are off patent limits and remaining drugs will be off the list by the time law comes into force in the next ten years. This would give Indian industries sufficient time to build its re­search & development activities. The objec­tives to be achieved by TRIPS agreement are (1) to promote technological innovation (2) transfer and dissemination of technology to the mutual advantage of producers and us­ers. But these objectives will be achieved in a manner conducive to social and economic

welfare and to a balance of rights and obliga­tions. While achieving these objectives of TRIPS, the country is free to formulate and amend its national laws and regulations, and even adopt measures necessary to protect public health and nutrition and to promote the public interest in sectors of vital impor­tance to its social economic & technological development. The country is also free to take appropriate measures to prevent the abuse

'of intellectual property rights by right hold­ers or resort to practice which unreasonably restrain trade or adversely affect the interna­tional transfer of technology. The increase in the number of filing of patent applications particularly by Indian applicants is therefore one of the indicators of the scientific & indus­trial development which is likely to take place in the country in future thereby en­hancing the prospects of more and more transfer of technologies not only in the phar­maceutical sector but other sectors also. Therefore enhancement of patenting activi­ties in post wro era is a good sign of scien­tific and technological development of the country to place it on the world map boldly.

Rererences

1. The Patents Act, 1970.

2. Annual Reports of the Controller Gen­eral of Patents Designs & Trademarks for the year 1972, 75 and 1982-83 to 1993-94.

3. Gazette of India, Part III, Section 2.

4. The Economic Times Data Bank 1995.

5. Chem. Ind. News, 34(2),1994.

6. Text of TRIPS Agreement.

7. Ayyanger Report

(The views expressed in the article are 0/ author and not the views 0/ the organization in which he is working).