ARTICLE · 03 JUNE 2010

Important Patent Notification

Vaish Associates Advocates

Explore more from Vaish Associates Advocates

The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks of India, by its notification dated 24.12.2009, has called all Patentees and Licensees to furnish information in Form No. 27 on working of patents as prescribed under Section 146 of the Patents Act (as amended) read with Rule 131 of the Patents Rules 2003 (as amended).

IndiaIntellectual Property

Vijay Pal Dalmia

Author LinkedIn connections

The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks of India, by its notification dated 24.12.2009, has called all Patentees and Licensees to furnish information in Form No. 27 on working of patents as prescribed under Section 146 of the Patents Act (as amended) read with Rule 131 of the Patents Rules 2003 (as amended). Attention of the Patentees / licensees are also invited to provisions of Section 122 of the Patents Act, 1970( as amended) wherein penalty is prescribed for non-submission of such information.

Therefore, all Patentees and Licensees are now required to comply with the above provision of law by filing the information in Form 27, i.e. STATEMENT REGARDING THE WORKING OF THE PATENTED INVENTION ON COMMERCIAL SCALE IN INDIA. (http://www.ipindia.nic.in/iponew/publicNotice_24December2009.pdf )

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Process Patent Infringement And The Burden Of Proof Under Section 104A In India: Lessons From NOCIL v. Finorchem

IndiaIntellectual Property

S.S. Rana & Co.

Only Urgent Interim Relief Qualifies As Grounds For Exemption From Pre-Institution Mediation: The Calcutta High Court’s ITC v. SMM Tobacco Ruling

IndiaIntellectual Property

S.S. Rana & Co.

Trade Mark Rights And The Resale Of Genuine Goods In India: The Limits Of A Brand Owner’s Control From MRF v. Conveyo Belt Centre To Kapil Wadhwa And TTK v. Hiveloop

IndiaIntellectual Property

S.S. Rana & Co.

Delhi HC’s Interim Order On ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. OpenAI OPCO LLC

GlobalIntellectual Property

Patents Do Not Exhaust Trade Secrets – Scope Of Patent Disclosure Clarified

IndiaIntellectual Property

Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Intellectual Property
- Patent

Related Comparative Guides

Comparative Guide

Intellectual Property

Comparative Guide

Patent Litigation

Comparative Guide

Franchise & Licensing

Comparative Guide

Trademark Disputes

See more popular content from

Intellectual Property

How To Check Indian Patent Application Status?

Indian patent application status refers to the latest status of an application in the tracking system of the Indian Patent Office.

IndiaIntellectual Property

YouTube Copyright Strikes Explained: How Creators Can Protect Their Content

YouTube operates within the framework of international copyright laws and has policies to protect intellectual property owners while balancing fair use.

IndiaIntellectual Property

De Penning & De Penning

Trademark Registration Fees In India: Complete Fees Structure

Learn about the trademark registration fees in India, including costs for individuals, startups, and businesses. Understand filing methods, additional charges, and more.

IndiaIntellectual Property

Copy, Right? ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC

When an artificial intelligence system is trained on copyrighted news content, and later answers a user’s question using what it learned, has the law been broken? On 24th July 2026, the Delhi High Court answered that question, at least for now. In ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC, Justice Amit Bansal declined to grant an interim injunction against OpenAI, holding, on a prima facie, interim stage view, that the company’s use of ANI’s news content to train its large language models (“LLMs”) falls within the fair dealing exception under Section 52(1)(a) of the Copyright Act, 1957

IndiaIntellectual Property

S.S. Rana & Co.

AI, Deepfakes & Copyright In India: The 2026 Legal Position

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized the production, reproduction and dissemination of creative works, as well as posing intricate challenges for copyright law. A major type of synthetic media, deepfakes also pose further issues regarding copyright violations, personality rights, privacy concerns, and intermediary liability.

IndiaIntellectual Property

Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants

India’s Patent Office Sets Guardrails For AI-Assisted Examination

The Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks published the Guidelines for the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Patent Examination Procedures on August 7, 2026, laying down a framework for the use of AI in patent examination.

IndiaIntellectual Property

India's First AI Copyright Ruling: The Delhi High Court In ANI v. OpenAI

The Delhi High Court, in ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. OpenAI OpCo LLC, has delivered India's first significant ruling on the application of copyright law to the training and functioning of large language models ("LLMs").

IndiaIntellectual Property

Authorship vs Ownership Of Work Under The Copyright Act; What Is The Difference?

The Copyright Act, 1957 uses two different terms for a work- ‘Authorship' and ‘Ownership'. Is there a difference between the two?

IndiaIntellectual Property

Naik Naik & Company

Film Piracy In India

Film Piracy is the unauthorised copying, distribution or sharing of movies and films without the consent of the creators, or producers.

IndiaIntellectual Property

Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorneys

AI Training Data, Copyright Risk And Commercial Liability: What Businesses Need To Know

On 8 October 2026, USA Today Co. and its affiliated newspaper companies, which publish 19 titles including USA Today, the Detroit Free Press and The Arizona Republic, sued seven OpenAI entities in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges that OpenAI copied their journalism to train its models, stripped identifying information from it, and now uses those models to give ChatGPT users summaries that substitute for the original reporting. The publishers seek more than USD 250 million in damages, an injunction and an order for the destruction of models and training sets containing their content.

IndiaIntellectual Property