Skip to main content

Neeti Wilson discusses the challenge to section 24(5) of the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act 2001 and more in Expert Guides.

India is an agriculture based economy even when it is India being recognized as the global power in the key economic sectors with consistent high economic growth. Indian agriculture contributes to 8% global agricultural gross domestic product to support 18% of world population. Indian biodiversity boasts of nearly 8% of the world’s documented animal and plant species. Agriculture contribution in the gross domestic product in India is about 15% and the agriculture sector provides employment to about 52% of the workforce. Therefore, conservation of natural resources, maintenance of biological wealth and acceleration of agricultural growth to feed the ever-increasing population are considered of paramount importance.

The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001 (PPVFRA), the Indian sui-generic statute for IPR over Plant varieties is therefore expected to have maximum impact on the Indian IPR regime. The Indian legislation is not only in conformity with International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV), 1978, but also have sufficient provisions to protect the interests of public sector breeding institutions and the farmers. The legislation recognizes the contributions of both commercial plant breeders and farmers in plant breeding activity and also provides to implement TRIPs in a way that supports the specific socio-economic interests of all the stakeholders.

The Plant Variety protection system is functional only for a decade and its first constitutional controversy has already reached the Apex Court in India. The PPVFRA is being reviewed by the Supreme Court of India for the provisional rights provided to the plant variety applications pending for registration before the Registrar of Patents which were declared void by the Delhi High Court.

Published in Expert Guides.

Most Recent

News & Insights

VIEW ALL
News & Updates
Dec 05, 2025

The High Court of Delhi in a significant interim ruling, “AB SKF vs M/S PARAMOUNT BEARING CO. & ORS.”, CS(COMM) 963/2025, dated 19/11/2025 has clarified

Distinction Between Order 38, Rule 5 and Order 39, Rules 1-2 CPC in the Context of “Maintenance of Status Quo”
News & Updates
Nov 26, 2025

Authored by Pravin Anand There are areas of intellectual property law where one can sense, quite literally, the convergence of disciplines that do not

When Art Meets Science in Trademark Law: Reflections on India’s First Smell Mark
Thought Leadership
Nov 25, 2025

First published on Lexology. Authored by Vaishali R Mittal In a landmark moment for Indian intellectual property law, the Trademarks Registry has accepted

Scenting the Future: How India’s First Smell Mark Application Aligns with Global Jurisprudence
Thought Leadership
Nov 21, 2025

We are proud to share that the Trade Marks Registry of India has, for the first time, accepted an olfactory (smell) mark for advertisement — “Floral

A Landmark First for Indian Trademark Law