IP Intelligence › Case Explainers › Replacing bamboo with plastic is not an invention
Case in 90 seconds
Replacing bamboo with plastic is not an invention
High Court of Himachal Pradesh · 2007 · reported at 2008 (36) PTC 123 (HP); judgment 20 September 2007
What happened
A patentee held a patent for an improved kilta - a traditional Himachali load-carrying basket - in which bamboo had been replaced with polypropylene copolymer and adjustable nylon straps added. It sued a plastics manufacturer.
What the fight was about
Whether substituting a modern material for a traditional one, in an article used for centuries, amounted to an invention.
What the court decided
No prima facie case; interim relief refused. Substituting synthetic polymer for bamboo was not an inventive step and conferred no novelty. The kilta had been in public use for centuries, so the claimed article was in substance traditional knowledge. The Court also observed that grant of a patent does not automatically entitle the patentee to an injunction.
Why an inventor should care
Making an old thing out of a new material is the most common patent idea there is, and one of the least likely to succeed.
What a patent professional should take from it
Useful on section 2(1)(ja) inventive step, section 3(f) and section 3(p) traditional knowledge, and on the proposition that grant does not entitle a patentee to relief as of right.
A modern material in an old design is usually a workshop change, not an invention.
Find this judgment in our case law database ›
This is a patent case, not a design case, and it is frequently mis-described as one. The judgment date is 2007 even though it is reported in 2008.
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
- Section 3, Patents Act 1970 - what are not inventions — Official IP India section 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…
Any improvement to a known product can be patented.
An improvement has to be more than a workshop change, and in chemistry and pharmaceuticals a new form of a known substance faces a further test under section 3(d).
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…
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.