Intellectual Property Appellate Board

The Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority and Ors. v. Daawat Foods Limited and ors.

MANU/IC/0001/2016

05.02.2016

Intellectual Property Rights

APEDA’s basmati victory turns out hollow

Madras High Court directed the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority to not take action against Basmati rice farmers in Madhya Pradesh, after the IPAB rejected their objections to being excluded from the geographical indication. Filed by APEDA, the GI application purported use of the ‘Basmati’ rice brand only by rice growers in Punjab, Haryana, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi and J&K. The Respondents, farmers in several other States, had claimed inclusion of other areas, including Madhya Pradesh and areas of Pakistan, in the GI. The IPAB had instead accepted ADEPA’s arguments that the combination of quality and reputation were intertwined with the place of origin. Respondents’ claims of similar-quality rice grown for several decades and possible adverse effects on cultivators’ livelihoods did not convince the Board to expand the geographic scope of the GI.

Relevant

Section 10 Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority Act, 1985 Dyer Meakin Breweries Ltd., Solan, Himachal Pradesh vs. The Scotch Whisky Association, Edinburgh, Scotland MANU/DE/0386/1979

Basmati geographical indication

Tags : Ipr geographical indications basmati

Share :