IP Intelligence › Case Explainers › The case that still defines inventive step in India
Case in 90 seconds
The case that still defines inventive step in India
Supreme Court of India · 1978 · (1979) 2 SCC 511; judgment delivered 13 December 1978
What happened
A patent covering a device and method for mounting metallic utensils on a lathe, for turning before polishing, was challenged.
What the fight was about
Whether combining known components in a known way, to produce a practical workshop improvement, amounted to an invention.
What the court decided
The patent was revoked as a mere workshop improvement - a normal development of an existing manner of manufacture, combining old and known components. The Court asked whether the alleged discovery lies so much out of the track of what was known before as not to suggest itself naturally to a person thinking on the subject; and whether a competent craftsman or engineer, with the common general knowledge and faced with the problem but without knowledge of the patent, would have arrived at it.
Why an inventor should care
Being the first person to actually build something is not the same as it being inventive. If a competent person in your field, given the problem, would have got there, the law treats it as obvious however useful it is.
What a patent professional should take from it
Still the reference point for obviousness arguments in India, and still routinely cited. Note the provenance: it was decided under the Indian Patents and Designs Act, 1911, not the 1970 Act, and the judgment date is 1978 even though it is reported in 1979.
A useful workshop improvement is not automatically an invention.
Find this judgment in our case law database ›
Cite (1979) 2 SCC 511. The AIR citation is rendered inconsistently across databases and should be verified independently before use in a filing.
This is an editorial case note prepared by Ragulika IP - a summary of a decision, not the text of the judgment, and not authority. Read the judgment itself before relying on any point.
Sources & further reading
- The Patents Act, 1970 (consolidated to 1 August 2024) — Official IP India text
Related
Inventive step
An invention has an inventive step if, compared with what was already known, it involves a technical advance or an economic significance (or both) and would not have…
New is the easy part. Inventive is the hard part.
Novelty is a single-document test and it is largely mechanical. Inventive step is a judgement about whether a competent, unimaginative person in your field would hav…
Person skilled in the art
A legal fiction: a competent practitioner in the relevant field who knows the common general knowledge and all the prior art, but has no inventive capacity of their …
Not sure whether this applies to your invention?
The honest answer usually needs someone to look at your actual disclosure, your timeline and the prior art. That is a conversation, not an article.
Educational guidance, not legal advice. This material is published by Ragulika IP for general education and information. It is not legal advice, it does not create a professional-client relationship, and it is not a substitute for advice on your own facts. Patentability, infringement, prosecution strategy and every other IP outcome turn on the specific facts and on the law and Patent Office practice as they stand at the time you act. Please take professional advice before making a decision, and read the underlying provision or judgment before relying on any point stated here.
Last reviewed by Ragulika IP on 2026-08-23. Indian patent law and Patent Office practice change; check the position before you rely on it.