Willowood Chemicals v. Assistant Controller, Parallel Import in Indian Patent Act, Drafting a Patent

The LexCampus Weekly Newsletter No.23
9th June, 2021


This week’s judgement is from the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), Delhi Bench which discusses the objections of lack of inventive step and section 3(e) of the Patent Act, 1970 in respect to an herbicidal composition. The case also appreciates synergy determination in such composition. This week’s blogpost gives an exhaustive overview of statutory provisions concerning parallel imports in Indian Patent law. This week we continue with the topic of drafting, the Body of Claims.


Willowood Chemicals Private Limited v. Assistant Controller of Patents & Designs

Willowood appealed before the IPAB against the order passed by the Controller refusing the grant of patent on the grounds of lack of inventive step and non patentable subject matter of claims under section 3(e) of the Patents Act, 1970. According to the appellant, the subject matter is an herbicidal composition which is novel and non obvious. The court accepted the contention of appellant with respect to objections of novelty and inventive step. It also opined that the invention exhibited synergic effect which is greater than the sum of the technical effects of the individual features that is sufficient to overcome section 3(e) objection and dismissed the impugned order. Read more


Parallel Imports in Indian Patent Act

Section 107A of the Patents Act, 1970 is envisaged in Chapter XVIII concerning ‘Suits Concerning Infringement of Patents’. Categorically, section 107A (b) deals with the concept of parallel imports based on the principle of exhaustion of rights. Parallel imports concerns the importation of patented products from a country in which the products are legally on the market. This blog post explores the statutory provisions with respect to parallel imports under Indian patent law. It also highlights the TRIPS compliance with respect to the said provision. Read more


  1. In a single paragraph claim, each elements should be well differentiated with commas between the elements.
  2. Preferably no other punctuations such as dashes, parentheses are used except for references.

That’s all folks for this week.

Team LexCampus

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Want to Learn Patent Law?

The most in-depth online course in Patent Law in India at the most affordable price of just Rs.199 per month.


Firstly it changed the approach of looking at the subject. At the first instance bare act seemed dry. The lecture series actually explained 'why' of the topic and statutes. Which helped in understanding the way the things are .

Nachiket Galgali

To receive updates on Patent Case Laws, Patent Articles, Patent Q&A & more in your inbox, subscribe to our free newsletter.