Section 26. In cases of "obtaining" Controller may treat the patent as the patent of opponent

26. In cases of "obtaining" Controller may treat the patent as the patent of opponent . — (1) Where in any opposition proceeding under this Act the Controller finds that — (a) the invention, so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification, was obtained from the opponent in the manner set out in clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 25 and revokes the patent on that ground, he may, on request by such opponent made in the prescribed manner, direct that the patent shall stand amended in the name of the opponent; (b) a part of an invention described in the complete specification was so obtained from the opponent, he may pass an order requiring that the specification be amended by the exclusion of that part of the invention. 26. Omit the Schedule. STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS (2) Where an opponent has, before the date of the order of the Controller requiring the amendment of a complete specification referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1), filed an application for a patent for an invention which included the whole or a part of the invention held to have been obtained from him and such application is pending, the Controller may treat such application and specification in so far as they relate to the invention held to have been obtained from him, as having been filed, for the purposes of this Act relating to the priority dates of claims of the complete specification, on the date on which the corresponding document was or was deemed to have been filed by the patentee in the earlier application but for all other purposes the application of the opponent shall be proceeded with as an application for a patent under this Act.] 27. [ Refusal of patent without opposition .]— Omitted by Act the Patents (Amendment) Act , 2005 (15 of 2005), s . 24 ( w.e.f . 1-1-2005). The law relating to patents now on the statute book was enacted in 1911 and since then there have been substantial changes in the political and economic conditions of the country. Although the Act has been in force for a very long period, it has not achieved its main purpose of stimulating inventions among Indians and encouraging the development and exploitation of new inventions for industrial progress in this country. The need for a more comprehensive law so as to ensure that patent rights are not worked to the detriment of the consumer or to the prejudice of the trade or the Industrial development of the country was felt as early 1948 and in that year the Government appointed a Committee known as the patents. Enquiry Committee to review the working of the patents law in India with a view to ensure that the patent system became more conducive to national interests. An interim report of that Committee made in 1949 suggested the immediate amendment of the Indian patents and Designs Act, 1911, so as to counteract the misuse or abuse of patent monopoly in India by the enactment of provisions for compulsory licensing. The recommendations contained in that interim report were given effect to by the Indian patents and Designs (Amendment) Act, 1950. The final report of the Committee was presented to Government in 1950, and based on the final report a Bill further to amend the Indian Patents and Design Act, 1911, was introduced in the Lok Sabha on the 7th December, 1953. While the Bill was pending, a further examination of the law revealed that the Bill would need extensive amendments and consequently it was not proceeded with and was allowed to lapse on the dissolution of the First Lok Sabha.