Power of Controller to make Orders Respecting Dating of Application and Cases of Anticipation :

Section 17 provides that at any time after the filing of an application and before the grant of the patent, the Controller may at the request of the applicant direct that the application shall be post-dated to such date as may be specified in the request and proceed with the application accordingly. However, no application shall be post-dated to a date later than six months from the date on which it was actually made or would be deemed to have been made. This is subject to the provisions of Section 9 of the Act dealing with provisional and complete specifications.

Where an application or specification (including drawings) or any other document is required to be amended under Section 15, the application or specification or other document shall, if the Controller so directs, be deemed to have been made on the date on which the requirement is complied with or where the application or specification or other document is returned to the applicant, the date on which it is refiled after complying with the requirement.

Section 18 says that where it appears to the Controller that the invention so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification has been anticipated, he may refuse the application unless the applicant:

(a) shows to the satisfaction of the Controller that the priority date of the claim of his complete specification is not later than the date on which the relevant document was published; or

(b) amends his complete specification to the satisfaction of the Controller.

If it appears to the Controller that the invention is claimed in a claim of any other complete specification, he may, direct that a reference to that other specification be inserted in the applicant’s complete specification unless the applicant shows to the satisfaction of the Controller that the priority date of his claim is not later than the priority date of the claim of the said other specification; or the complete specification has been amended to his satisfaction.

The above-mentioned provisions also apply in the case where it appears to the Controller that the invention so far claimed in any claim of the applicant’s complete specification has been claimed in other complete specification referred to in section 13(1)(a) and that such other complete specification was published on or before the priority date of the applicant’s claim.

The Controller of Patents is not technically a Court, or a tribunal exercising judicial functions in the legal acceptation of the terms, but that does not make it untrue to say that, so far as he has a duty imposed him to hear and determine objections to applications for leave to amend, there is a fair analogy between his position and the position of a Court. [In re: National Carbon Co. Incorporated AIR 1934 Cal. 725].