Monsanto moves SC on MRTPC ruling

Explore Business Standard

| The petition, filed by the joint venture partner of the US major, is yet to be listed for hearing. The company argues that the commission had no jurisdiction to hear the petition against it or to fix prices. It also said, the Andhra Pradesh government, which approched the commission is not an 'undertaking' which has a standing in the case. The government merely grants licences to sell the seeds and it is therefore not an undertaking. |
| Monsanto further contends that there is no agreement to sell seeds by the company. The agreement between the Indian company and the sub-licencees was more of transfer of technology and there was no trade in goods. The company charges a 'trait fee' which is in the nature of royalty payments required to be paid by the sub-licenceess for incorporation of the Bollard technology into the seed. Monsanto submits that the commission had passed its order regarding the prices on the basis of what the US company charged in countries such as China. It proceeded on the assumption that in China the company was charging Rs 90 per kg as trait fee. There was no valid basis to come to that conclusion. |
| "There is no provision in law which states that the inventor of a new and useful product cannot allow a person to use his product on the payment of a fee for such use, regardless of the fact of whether the inventor holds a patent under the Indian law," says the petition. |
First Published: May 17 2006 | 12:00 AM IST