Delhi High Court Sets Aside Single Judge Order Upholding Revocation Of PepsiCo's Registration For Potato Variety Used In Lay's Chips

The Delhi High Court yesterday set aside a single judge's order which upheld an order passed by the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Rights Authority revoking Pepsico India's registration with respect to a potato variety used for making Lay's chips.

A division bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma set aside the order passed by the single judge on July 05 last year as well as the order of the Authority and its letter dated February 11, 2022, rejecting PepsiCo's application for renewal of patent registration.

“The renewal application as made by PepsiCo shall stand restored on the file of the Registrar who shall dispose of the same in accordance with law and in light of the findings recorded hereinabove,” the court said.

The court was dealing with cross appeals filed against the single judge's order by PepsiCo and Kavitha Kurungati, a farmers' rights activist. The single judge had dismissed the appeal moved by PepsiCo challenging the Authority's order passed on December 03, 2022, on an application filed by Kurungati.

In appeal, PepsiCo was aggrieved by the decision to upheld the revocation order which had annulled the registration accorded in its favour in respect of plant variety FL 2027.

On the other hand, Kurungati contended that the revocation of patent registration was also liable to be upheld for non-compliance with the provisions of Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act,

2001, which constitutes a ground for revocation as per Section 34(f) of the enactment.

The court allowed PepsiCo's appeal and rejected the cross appeal moved by Kuruganti, observing thus:

“We however find ourselves unable to uphold the view taken by the learned Single Judge insofar as it holds against PepsiCo and pertaining to an incorrect mentioning of the date of first sale as well as the conclusions ultimately rendered in the context of the eligibility of PepsiCo to apply for registration and non-submission of relevant documentation.”

About the Case

The Authority had denied the relief to PepsiCo on various grounds mentioned under section 34 of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001. The provision states that the protection granted to a breeder in respect of a plant variety may, on an application of any person interested, be revoked by the Authority on certain grounds.

The Authority had observed that the grant of the certificate of registration was “based on incorrect information” furnished by PepsiCo regarding the date of the first sale of the potato variety and its category being “new” instead of “extant‟.

It was also observed that the certificate of registration was not in public interest and was not granted to a person who was not eligible for protection under the statute.

The single judge had said that no ground for interference with the impugned order was made out by PepsiCo, as even otherwise, the application for registration was deficient for its failure to provide necessary documents required under Section 16 read with Section 18(3) of the Act and Rule 27.

PepsiCo had told court that FL 2027 is a chipping potato variety with low external defects, high dry matter/high solids content and stable sugars, all of which make it highly suitable for the manufacture of chips.

“Because of these qualities, however, it requires more time and energy in the cooking process, making it unsuitable for use as a table potato or for everyday cooking in households. The appellant uses it for the manufacture of potato chips under the Lay's brand," the court was told.

It was also argued that the potato variety FL 2027 (commercial name - FC-5) was developed in USA by Dr. Robert W. Hoopes, a plant breeder and a former employee of Frito-Lay Agricultural Research, a division of PepsiCo Inc. 

Title: PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. v. KAVITHA KURUGANTI and other connected matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 39

Click Here To Read Order