← All questionsGS3 · 2013 · Science & Technology ·Patent Law / Glivec
QUESTION 14
GS3
10 marks

Bringing out circumstances in 2005 which forced amendment to Section 3(d) in Indian Patent Law, 1970, discuss how it was used by the Supreme Court in rejecting Novartis’ patent application for ‘Glivec’. Discuss briefly pros and cons of the decision.

WRITE IN
7 min
200 words
☆ Save✎ Write this answer

What the examiner wants

Discuss the exact proposition in the PYQ — “Bringing out circumstances in 2005 which forced amendment to Section 3(d) in Indian Patent Law, 1970, discuss how it was used by the Supreme Court in rejecting Novartis’ patent application for ‘Glivec’. Discuss briefly pros and…” — using concept/chronology or mechanism, evidence on both sides where relevant, and a conclusion that answers the directive rather than merely describing Patent Law / Glivec.

DiscussExplain the different sides of the issue, use evidence, and finish with a balanced view.

Demand-wise check

  1. 1For the prompt cue ‘Bringing out circumstances in 2005 which forced amendment to Section 3(d) in Indian Patent Law, 1970, discuss how it was used by t’, directly answer: Bringing out circumstances in 2005 which forced amendment to Section 3(d) in Indian Patent Law, 1970, discuss how it was used by the Supreme Court in rejecting…≈45 words
  2. 2For the prompt cue ‘Bringing out circumstances in 2005 which forced amendment to Section 3(d) in Indian Patent Law, 1970, discuss how it was used by t’, directly answer: Discuss briefly pros and cons of the decision≈45 words
  3. 3For the prompt cue ‘Bringing out circumstances in 2005 which forced amendment to Section 3(d) in Indian Patent Law, 1970, discuss’, add one verified official-source anchor and a limitation/counterpoint specific to Patent Law / Glivec≈45 words

Open in about 30 words and close in about 30.

Answer plan

Define/contextualise Patent Law / GlivecExplain mechanism/chronologyQuestion-specific evidence/examplesImplicationsConcise conclusion

Where marks usually go

  • For the prompt cue ‘Bringing out circumstances in 2005 which forced amendment to Section 3(d) in Indian Patent Law, 1970, discuss how it was’, avoid a generic note on Patent Law / Glivec; answer the actual wording/directive and the Patent Law / Glivec proposition
  • For the prompt cue ‘Bringing out circumstances in 2005 which forced amendment to Section 3(d) in Indian Patent Law, 1970, discuss how it was’, do not add examples around Patent Law / Glivec unless they prove, qualify or rebut the proposition asked

Value addition

  • Provision/institution → issue → implication table
    → Draw it in the body, next to the point it supports.

Official source anchors

These are authoritative sources selected for this exact PYQ. Where a card is an official-domain anchor rather than a fact-level citation, verify the precise provision, definition or data point on the linked source before using it.