Rule 65 of the Patents Rules, 2003
Omitted provision
This rule number in the opposition chapter of the Patents Rules now stands omitted and carries no procedure of its own.
Official legal text
Indian drafting practice deletes a provision by omitting it, not by closing the gap. Renumbering would break thousands of existing citations, so the number is retained with a note. Records made while the provision was in force still cite it, which is the main reason this page exists.
This explanation is written for clarity, not for citation. The official statutory text and any Gazette notification in force on your date govern, and they prevail over anything said here.
What this rule requires, step by step
The Patents Rules, 2003 print only the word Omitted at Rule 65. It sits inside Chapter VI, the chapter that governs opposition to the grant of a patent. Opposition is the process by which a third party tells the Patent Office that a claimed invention should not be patented, or should not have been patented. Rule 65 belonged to the older, single opposition procedure that the 2003 Rules first put in place, before the opposition system in India was rebuilt.
The rebuilding happened because the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 recast section 25. Opposition was split into two separate routes: a pre-grant representation that anyone may file while an application is pending, and a post-grant opposition that only a person interested may file after grant. The Patents (Amendment) Rules, 2006 rewrote Chapter VI to match, and the procedural rules that served the earlier scheme were removed. The drafters cleared the text but left the number in place, so the numbering of the surviving rules did not shift and older citations still line up.
Nothing is missing from the law because of this. A reader looking for opposition procedure today should read section 25 together with Rule 55 for pre-grant representations, Rule 55A for filing a notice of post-grant opposition, Rule 56 for the constitution of the Opposition Board, Rules 57 to 61 for statements and evidence, Rule 62 for the hearing and Rule 63 for costs. Read together, those rules cover every step Rule 65 could once have touched.
Why this rule matters
Anyone reading an older textbook, judgment or office manual that cites Rule 65, and students comparing the 2003 Rules with the current text.
Only when checking a citation or tracing how Indian opposition procedure changed after 2005.
No right or obligation. The number is a placeholder that keeps the rest of Chapter VI numbered as it always was.
A reader may waste time searching for a rule that no longer has any content, or may follow an outdated commentary that still describes it.
How it works in practice
A citation that leads nowhere
A law student in Nagpur is preparing a seminar paper on patent opposition in India. She works from a 2004 commentary borrowed from her college library, which describes Chapter VI of the Patents Rules step by step and refers to Rule 65. When she opens the current Rules on the Patent Office website, Rule 65 shows only the word Omitted. She assumes the website is incomplete and spends two days looking for the missing text. Her supervisor explains what actually happened: the 2005 amendment to section 25 created two different kinds of opposition, the 2006 amendment rules rewrote the whole chapter to fit, and several old procedural rules were emptied out rather than renumbered. She rewrites her chapter around section 25, Rule 55, Rule 55A and Rules 56 to 63, and notes in a footnote that Rule 65 stands omitted.
Simplified illustration only. Actual legal outcomes depend on the facts.
Key points to remember
- Rule 65 has no operative content today; the Rules simply record it as omitted.
- It belonged to the pre-2005 opposition procedure that section 25 replaced.
- The numbers of omitted rules are left in place so surviving rules keep their familiar numbering.
- For opposition today, read section 25 with Rules 55, 55A and 56 to 63.
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
We do not publish fee amounts. The First Schedule sets them, and they differ by category of applicant, such as a natural person, a startup, a small entity or another applicant, and by the mode of filing. Check the Schedule currently in force before you calculate anything. How Indian patent fees work.
Related judgments
No judgment summaries appear here yet. Our process requires a legal review of each case note before publication, covering the citation, the court and the point actually decided. Until a note for this provision has passed that check, the section stays empty rather than carrying unverified material. How case notes are prepared.
Questions people ask about Rule 65
What did Rule 65 of the Patents Rules say?
The current Rules do not carry any text at Rule 65, so nothing can be quoted from it. It was one of the procedural rules that supported the single opposition process the 2003 Rules originally created. When the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 split opposition into pre-grant representations and post-grant oppositions, the 2006 amendment rules rewrote Chapter VI and this rule was dropped. Anyone who needs the original 2003 wording should consult the gazette version of the Rules as first published, and treat it as history rather than as law in force.
Which rules govern patent opposition in India now?
Section 25 of the Patents Act sets out both routes. Rule 55 governs a pre-grant representation, which any person may file after publication and before grant. Rule 55A governs the notice of post-grant opposition, which only a person interested may file within the period allowed after publication of the grant. Rule 56 provides for the Opposition Board that examines a post-grant opposition and makes recommendations. Rules 57 to 61 cover written statements, evidence and further evidence, Rule 62 covers the hearing and Rule 63 covers costs.
Confused by an opposition rule that no longer exists?
MYCrave Consultancy maps outdated citations to the rules that actually apply today and explains what changed.
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.