Parliament of India

“ An invention claimed in a complete specification shall not be deemed to have been anticipated by reason only that the invention was published in a specification filed in pursuance of an application for a patent made in India and dated before the 1st day of January, 1912. ”

“ Where two or more applications in the name of the same applicant are accompanied by provisional specifications in respect of inventions which are cognate or of which one is a modification of another and the Controller is of opinion that the whole of such inventions are such as to constitute a single invention and may properly be included in one patent, he may allow one complete specification to be filed in respect of all such provisional specifications. ”

“ If it appears to the Controller that any invention, in respect of which an application for a patent is made, might be used in any manner contrary to law, he may refuse the application, unless the specification is amended by the insertion of such disclaimer in respect of that use of the invention, or such other reference to the illegality thereof, as the Controller thinks fit. ”

“ The Controller or any other officer of the patent office shall not, in any legal proceedings to which he is not a party, be compellable to produce the register or any other document in his custody, the contents of which can be proved by the production of a certified copy issued under this Act or to appear as a witness to prove the matters therein recorded unless by order of the court made for special causes. ”

“ A patent shall be granted for one invention only: Provided that it shall not be competent for any person in a suit or other proceeding to take any objection to a patent on the ground that it has been granted for more than one invention. ”

“ If in any proceedings before a High Court for the revocation of a patent under section 64 the validity of any claim of a specification is contested and that claim is found by the Court to be valid, the Court may certify that the validity of that claim was contested in those proceedings and was upheld. ”

“ If any dispute arises between joint applicants for a patent whether or in what manner the application should be proceeded with, the Controller, may upon application made to him in the prescribed manner by any of the parties, and after giving to all parties concerned an opportunity to be heard, give such directions as he thinks fit for enabling the application to proceed in the name of one or more of the parties alone or for regulating the manner in which it should be proceeded with, or for both those purposes, as the case may require. ”

“ If any party by whom notice of any opposition is given under this Act or by whom application is made to the Controller for the grant of a licence under a patent neither resides nor carries on business in India,the Controller may require him to give security for the costs of the proceedings, and in default of such security being given may treat the opposition or application as abandoned. ”