Section 146 of the Patents Act, 1970
Power of Controller to call for information from patentees
Section 146 lets the Controller demand information on how a patented invention is being worked in India, and requires periodic working statements.
Official legal text
The verbatim statutory text of this provision is reproduced from the official source and checked by our legal reviewer before it is published here. Until that check is complete for this page, read the exact wording directly from the official source linked below — it is the only version that governs.
This is a simplified explanation. Where it differs from the official text of the provision, or from an applicable Gazette notification, the official text and the notification prevail.
What this section says, in plain language
Section 146 is the information gathering arm of India's working requirement. It has two limbs. Under the first, the Controller may at any time while a patent is in force serve a written notice on the patentee or on any licensee, exclusive or otherwise, asking for information or a statement about the extent to which the patented invention has been worked on a commercial scale in India. The person served must reply within two months of the notice, or within such further time as the Controller allows.
The second limb does not wait for a notice. Every patentee and every licensee must file a statement about the extent to which the invention has been worked commercially in India, in the form and at the intervals set by the Rules. Rule 131, as amended in 2024, requires that statement on Form 27 once in respect of every period of three financial years, filed within six months from the expiry of each such three-year period. The cycle begins with the financial year commencing immediately after the financial year in which the patent was granted. Before the 2024 amendment the statement was due every financial year, so older guidance and older diary entries will show the annual cycle. A single Form 27 may cover related patents where the working data cannot sensibly be separated, and joint patentees may file together.
The third limb allows the Controller to publish the information received. Working statements are therefore public documents. Anyone considering a compulsory licence application under Section 84, or watching whether the reasonable requirements of the public are being met, can read what the patentee has said about its own working.
This is why the section carries teeth. Section 122 makes it an offence to refuse or fail to furnish information required under Section 146, and makes it a more serious offence, punishable with imprisonment, to give information that is false and that the person knows or has reason to believe is false. The obligation is on the patentee and each licensee separately, so an exclusive licensee cannot assume the patentee's filing covers it.
Working information also feeds the policy machinery in Section 83, which sets out the principles that patents should be worked in India on a commercial scale and should not be granted merely to enable importation. Section 146 is how the system finds out whether that is happening.
Why this section matters
Every patentee holding a granted Indian patent, and every licensee under it, including exclusive licensees and Indian subsidiaries of foreign patent owners.
Annually after grant, and at any time the Controller chooses to issue a written notice during the life of the patent.
A continuing statutory duty to disclose commercial working of the invention in India, and a power in the Controller to demand and publish that information.
Non-filing or late filing attracts penalty under Section 122, false statements can lead to imprisonment, and thin working data can be used against the patentee in a compulsory licence application.
How it works in practice
A licensee who assumed someone else would file
Girija Biotech Pvt Ltd in Pune took an exclusive licence over an Indian patent covering a soil inoculant formulation. The patent was owned by a company in Singapore. Girija manufactured and sold the product in India for two financial years and assumed the owner was handling all Patent Office paperwork. The owner, for its part, filed a working statement that reported only its own direct sales, which were nil. When a fertiliser cooperative later applied for a compulsory licence under Section 84 and pointed to the nil working record, the patent looked unworked on the face of the file even though the product was in fact being made in Maharashtra. Girija then had to explain a two year gap in its own statutory filings, exposing it to action under Section 122. The obligation under Section 146 sits on the patentee and on each licensee separately. Licence agreements should say in writing who files what, and both parties should still file.
Simplified illustration only. Actual legal outcomes depend on the facts.
Key points to remember
- The Controller can require a patentee or licensee, by written notice, to state how the invention has been worked commercially in India.
- A reply to that notice is due within two months, extendable at the Controller's discretion.
- Separately, working statements must be filed on Form 27 for every financial year, within six months of the end of that financial year.
- Both the patentee and every licensee carry the duty; one filing does not automatically cover the other.
- The Controller may publish the information, so working statements are public.
- Failure to supply information, or supplying false information, is an offence under Section 122.
- The data collected feeds directly into compulsory licence proceedings under Section 84.
Common mistakes and misunderstandings
- Thinking the working statement is optional or a formality. It is a statutory filing backed by penal consequences under Section 122.
- Assuming that importing the patented product into India is automatically enough. The statement must set out the actual position, and Section 83 treats local commercial working as the objective.
- Believing only the patentee must file. Every licensee, including an exclusive licensee, has its own obligation.
- Writing a vague statement to avoid revealing commercial data. A statement that is misleading risks the false information offence, and a thin record helps a compulsory licence applicant.
Connected provisions
Sections and rules are different kinds of law. A section is enacted by Parliament, while a rule is made by the Central Government using powers the Act grants. Keeping them apart shows which text you are reading and which of the two is more likely to have been revised recently.
Forms, deadlines and fees
Prescribed forms sit in the Second Schedule to the Patents Rules. The Schedule is updated along with the Rules, so the safe practice is to download the form on the day you prepare it and check that it is the current version.
- A patentee or licensee served with a notice under this section must furnish the information within two months, unless the Controller allows longer.
- The working statement on Form 27 is filed once for every block of three financial years, within six months from the end of that three-year block (Rule 131 as amended in 2024). Confirm the current cycle before diarising.
Open the deadline calculator — and have every date confirmed against the current Rules before you rely on it.
The official fee for anything described on this page is set out in the First Schedule to the Patents Rules. It is not the same for every applicant, and it is not the same for online and physical filing, which is why no amount is stated here. How Indian patent fees work.
Amendment history
What changed in this provision, newest first. Read the footnotes in the official consolidated text for the full record.
- 2002The Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002The Controller's power to require a patentee or licensee to give information about the working of a patent was recast, and provision was made for publishing that information. The form and the intervals were left to the Rules. Attribution pending reviewer confirmation.
Compiled from official consolidated texts and Gazette notifications. See the site-wide change log.
Related judgments
Court decisions shape how this provision is applied, but a summary is useful only if it is right. Every case note on this site is read by a legal reviewer before it goes live, and none has been completed for this provision so far. This section will fill in as those reviews finish. How case notes are prepared.
Questions people ask about Section 146
What is Form 27 and who has to file it?
Form 27 is the statement of working under Section 146(2) and Rule 131. It tells the Patent Office whether and to what extent a granted Indian patent has been commercially worked in India. Both the patentee and every licensee must file it. Since the 2024 amendment to Rule 131 it is filed once for every block of three financial years, within six months from the end of that block, starting from the financial year that begins immediately after the year of grant. Earlier it was an annual filing, so older articles still describe a yearly cycle. A single form can cover related patents where the working data genuinely cannot be separated.
What happens if I do not file a working statement?
Refusing or failing to furnish information required under Section 146 is an offence under Section 122 and attracts a penalty. Furnishing information that is false, where the person knows or has reason to believe it is false, is treated far more seriously and can lead to imprisonment. Beyond the penalty, a missing or nil working record is public and can be used by an applicant for a compulsory licence under Section 84 to argue that the reasonable requirements of the public are not being satisfied.
Is the working statement confidential?
No. The section expressly allows the Controller to publish the information received, and working statements filed on Form 27 are available on the Patent Office systems. This is deliberate: the working data exists so that the public, potential licensees and compulsory licence applicants can see whether a patented invention is actually reaching the Indian market. Patentees should therefore prepare the statement knowing that competitors will read it, while still stating the position accurately.
Does importing the product count as working the patent in India?
The form asks the patentee to state the position, including whether the requirement of the public has been met through manufacture in India, through importation, or both. Section 83 records the principle that patents should not be granted merely to enable a monopoly on importation, and that inventions should be worked in India on a commercial scale. Whether importation alone is sufficient in a given case is contested and fact specific, and it is one of the issues examined when a compulsory licence is sought under Section 84.
Is your Form 27 working statement due this year?
MYCrave Consultancy helps patentees and licensees prepare accurate working statements that satisfy Section 146 without over-exposing commercial data.
You will be speaking with MYCrave Consultancy & Services, the firm that operates this platform. General questions are answered free; matter‑specific work is quoted before anything is done.