Delhi High Court dismisses Pepsi appeal against IPR revocation order

Pepsi had filed an appeal under the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001, challenging the December 3, 2021, order

Photo: Bloomberg
Photo: Bloomberg
Bhavini MishraSanjeeb Mukherjee New Delhi
2 min read Last Updated : Jul 07 2023 | 9:56 PM IST

Don't want to miss the best from Business Standard?

The Delhi High Court on July 5 dismissed Pepsi’s appeal against an order that revoked the company’s patent-protected potato variety used for making chips.

Pepsi had filed an appeal under the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001, challenging the December 3, 2021, order.

The Authority order revoked Pepsi’s registration with respect to plant variety- FL 2027 potato variety, on three grounds (Section 34(a), (b), (c) and (h)) of the Act. Pepsi’s application for renewal of its registration was also rejected.

Pepsi’s application for renewal of its registration was also rejected.

The grounds under which protection to Pepsi was revoked by the Authority are incorrect information furnished by the applicant; breeder not providing registrar with such information, documents or material as required for registration under this Act; and grant of the certificate of registration not being in public interest.
 
The revocation order, passed in December 2021, took away Pepsi’s Plant Variety Protection certificate on the potato variety.

Plant variety protection provides legal protection of a plant variety to a breeder in the form of plant breeder's rights (PBRs). PBRs are IPRs that provide exclusive rights to a breeder of the registered variety.

PepsiCo Inc (appellant) is engaged in manufacturing, distribution, and sale of non-alcoholic beverages such as Pepsi, Mirinda and 7UP. It also makes and sells salted snacks and foods such as Lay’s and Uncle Chipps.

The beverage company claimed that FL 2027 is a chipping potato variety with low-external defects. It has high dry matter/high solids content and stable sugars, all of which make it highly suitable for the manufacture of chips.

“Because of these qualities, however, it requires more time and energy in the cooking process, making it unsuitable for use as a table potato or for everyday cooking in households. The appellant uses it for the manufacture of potato chips under the Lay’s brand,” Pepsi said.

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

Topics :PepsiCoPotatoDelhi High Court

First Published: Jul 07 2023 | 9:56 PM IST

Next Story