IPAB reserves order on Basmati-GI dispute

Various parties related to the dispute completed argument in three consecutive days

The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) has reserved orders on the dispute between the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (Apeda) and the State of Madhya Pradesh and others related to Geographical Indications (GI) tag for basmati rice, after three consecutive days of hearing.

Hearing various parties related to the dispute, including APEDA, Madhya Pradesh Government, various organisations namely New Darpan Social Welfare Society, Madhya Kshetra Basmati Rice Exporters Association and Basmati Growers Association of Patiala, and private companies namely Daawat Foods Ltd, SSA International Ltd and Narmada Cereals Pvt Ltd, the bench comprising of IPAB Chairman Justice K N Basha and Technical Member (Trade Marks) Sanjeev Kumar Chaswal decided to reserve the orders.

J Sai Deepak, the counsel for the State of Madhya Pradesh and for other parties including Daawat Foods argued that not adding Madhya Pradesh under the GI for Basmati would have an impact on around 80,000 farmers in the region. He argued that the State's claim is to include 13 districts/regions in Madhya Pradesh in the GI.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate P S Raman, who appeared for Apeda, argued that Madhya Pradesh is not a State which is in the Indo-Gangetic Plane (IGP) where Basmati rice is being cultivated traditionally. It also argued that while the state claims that the rice produced there has charecteristics of Basmati, the temperature and the day length in the State is different from the traditional Basmati producing States and thus, it cannot be included under the GI.

While the New Darpan Social Welfare Society sought the Board to give the relief the State of Madhya Pradesh has sought, P V Yogeswaran, counsel appearing for Basmati Growers Association of Patiala argued that the GI should be given to places where the quality and reputation for Basmati are there. Meanwhile a dispute raised by the Basmati Growers Association from Pakistan has been kept aside for further hearing later.

The dispute emerged after Apeda filed an application with the GI Registry to register the name basmati for rice covering Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and a part of Uttar Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others raised opposition against the GI application seeking inclusion of the State into the GI for Basmati.

The assistant registrar of the GI Registry issued an order on December 31, 2013, in which it directed the Apeda to file an amended GI application including the uncovered area, with map of the region clearly demarcating the area of production within 60 days from the date of the order.

Apeda filed appeal with the IPAB against the order. Apeda has earlier filed an application for registration of basmati as GI in class 30 under the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act, 1999, without including area in MP.

The rice growers and producers claimed the rice produced in MP, particularly Morena, Bhind, Gwalior, Sheopur, Datia, Shirpur, Guna, Vidisha, Raiben, Sehore, Hoshangabad, Jabalpur and Narsinghpur, has the required characteristics of rice variety mentioned in the application of Apeda.

The Basmati Growers Association from Pakistan, formed to protect Basmati's interest in Pakistan, challenged the APEDA's move in the IPAB claiming that " 'Basmati' is a name for a slender, aromatic and long grain variety of rice grown in the specific geographical area at the foothills of the Himalayas in Pakistan."