Rule 134 of the Patents Rules, 2003
Request for information under section 153
Rule 134 prescribes how a person asks the Controller for information about whether a patent has been applied for or granted under Section 153.
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.
The authority is the enacted text, not this page. Where our wording and the official provision, or an applicable Gazette notification, do not match, the official material prevails.
What this rule requires, step by step
Section 153 gives any person the right to ask the Controller for information on matters the Act allows to be disclosed, such as whether an application has been made for a patent for a particular invention, whether a patent has been granted, and details of the record. Rule 134 turns that right into a procedure: the request is made on the form prescribed in the Second Schedule and is accompanied by the fee in the First Schedule. The Controller then supplies the information he is permitted to give.
The purpose is to remove guesswork from commercial decisions. A manufacturer about to invest in tooling wants to know whether a competitor's product is protected. A licensee wants to check that the patent it is paying for exists and stands in the name it was told. A buyer of a business wants confirmation that the patents in the schedule are real. Section 153 lets these questions be put to the Office itself rather than answered by inference.
There is a firm boundary. The Controller can only disclose what the Act permits. An application is confidential until it is published under Section 11A, and nothing in Section 153 opens that window early. So a request that effectively asks "has my competitor filed something secret in the last twelve months" will not be answered. Once an application has been published, its bibliographic details and specification are public and can be reported.
In practice, a large part of what people once sought under Section 153 is now available free on the Patent Office's public search and e-register systems, which show application status, publication, examination events, grant and renewal position. The formal request retains its value where the enquirer wants the Office's own answer for a file, where the online record is unclear or apparently incomplete, or where a specific factual confirmation is needed that a screenshot cannot supply. Where the answer must be usable as evidence, a certified copy or certificate obtained through Rule 133 is usually the better instrument.
Why this rule matters
Businesses doing freedom-to-operate checks, investors and acquirers, prospective licensees, and anyone verifying a claim that something is patented.
Before launching a product, before signing a licence or acquisition, and when a competitor asserts patent rights informally.
A statutory right to ask the Patent Office for information it is permitted to disclose, on payment of the prescribed fee.
Decisions get taken on assumption, and businesses either fear patents that do not exist or ignore ones that do.
How it works in practice
A Jaipur startup checks a supplier's patent claim
Rangoli Foods Pvt Ltd, a Jaipur startup, is offered an exclusive supply arrangement for a vacuum-drying unit. The supplier's brochure states that the design is patented in India and prices it accordingly. Rangoli's founder searches the Patent Office site and finds a published application but no clear record of grant, and the entry raises questions she cannot resolve on screen. Rather than accept the brochure or walk away, she files a request under Section 153 on the prescribed form with the fee, asking the Controller to confirm the status of the numbered application and whether a patent has been granted on it. The reply shows that the application is still pending and that no patent has yet been granted. Rangoli does not treat this as a reason to abandon the deal. It treats it as a reason to change the contract, replacing the flat royalty with a lower rate that steps up only if and when a patent is actually granted. The negotiation moves from marketing claims to record.
Simplified illustration only. Actual legal outcomes depend on the facts.
Key points to remember
- Rule 134 supplies the form and fee for the information right in Section 153.
- Any person may make the request; you do not need an interest in the patent.
- The Controller discloses only what the Act allows, so unpublished applications stay confidential until Section 11A publication.
- Much of the same information is now available free on the Patent Office search and e-register systems.
- Where the answer must serve as evidence, a certified copy or certificate under Rule 133 is the stronger document.
Common mistakes and misunderstandings
- Expecting the Controller to reveal a competitor's unpublished filing. Confidentiality before publication under Section 11A is not lifted by Section 153.
- Treating the reply as a clearance opinion. It reports record facts; it does not tell you whether your product infringes anything.
- Paying for a formal request when the free public search would have answered the question in minutes.
- Assuming a reply about one application covers a whole family. Divisionals, patents of addition and related filings each have their own record.
Connected provisions
Rules are made under the Act, not alongside it. That is why the connected sections appear in a block of their own. Reading the section tells you why the procedure exists, and reading the rule tells you the steps, forms and periods that put it into effect.
Forms, deadlines and fees
- Form 31 (check the current Second Schedule)
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.
Where a fee is payable under this provision, the figure comes from the First Schedule. Categories of applicant are charged at different rates, and electronic filing is treated differently from paper filing, so an accurate number can only come from the Schedule in force on the day you file. How Indian patent fees work.
Related judgments
Case summaries are published only after a qualified reviewer has checked the judgment, the citation and the way the holding is described. Nothing has cleared that review for this provision yet, so nothing is listed here. We would rather show no case note than one that misstates what a court decided. How case notes are prepared.
Questions people ask about Rule 134
Can I find out whether someone has applied for a patent on an idea?
Only once the application has been published. Indian applications are ordinarily published after eighteen months from the priority or filing date under Section 11A, and from that point the bibliographic details and the specification are public. Before publication the file is confidential, and a request under Section 153 will not open it. This is deliberate: it gives applicants a settled period in which to develop the invention and decide whether to continue, while guaranteeing that the disclosure eventually reaches the public.
Is a Section 153 request the same as a patent search?
No. A search is an exercise you or a professional carries out across databases to find what has been published anywhere, and it is how freedom-to-operate and novelty questions are approached. A Section 153 request asks the Indian Patent Office a specific question about its own records and gets an official answer. The two serve different needs: the search maps a landscape, the request confirms a fact. Neither is a substitute for legal analysis of whether a particular product falls within a particular claim.
Why pay a fee when the information is online for free?
For most routine checks you should use the free systems, and Rule 134 does not exist to duplicate them. The formal request earns its fee when the online record is ambiguous or seems incomplete, when an internal or investor file needs an answer that came from the Office rather than a screenshot, or when a counterparty disputes what the public record shows. If the answer is going to be used in a proceeding, consider instead a certified copy or a Section 147 certificate obtained through Rule 133.
Need to verify whether something is really patented in India?
MYCrave Consultancy runs status verifications and freedom-to-operate checks so you negotiate and launch on facts from the record, not on brochure claims.
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.