CS Executive · Economic, Commercial and Intellectual Property Laws · Law relating to Patents
Meera Labs, a Chennai firm, is directed by the Controller under section 35 not to publish information on its invention. It ignores the direction and publishes the details. What consequence does section 118 prescribe?
Under section 118, failing to comply with a section 35 secrecy direction is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. It is not limited to a fine or a mere warning.
- AOnly a warning from the Controller
- BImprisonment up to two years, or fine, or bothCorrect
- CFine only, with no imprisonment
- DImprisonment up to seven years and compulsory fine
Explanation
Section 118 punishes failure to comply with a direction under section 35 with imprisonment which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. It is not fine-only, and the term is not seven years.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Patents shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Law relating to Patents questions
- Meera Traders imports a patented medical device from a foreign supplier who is duly authorised under the law of that country to produce and …
- Ramesh Iyer, a Chennai resident with no patent agent registration, wants to run a business describing himself as a 'patent agent' and filing…
- Vayu Atomics Pvt Ltd, a Pune firm, files a patent application for an invention relating to atomic energy that falls within sub-section (1) o…
- Meera and Kabir are registered joint grantees of a patent. There is no agreement between them. Kabir wants to grant a licence to a Singapore…
- Asha Textiles Ltd and Bharat Dyes Pvt Ltd are registered as joint grantees of a patent. Their records show no agreement between them on shar…
- After Kiran Biotech Pvt Ltd's patent was granted, the Controller published the fact of grant. What is the effect of this publication on the …