Manual explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
When a Controller decides something against you, Chapter 18 of the Manual is the place to see what the Office says it may and may not do. It covers the powers of a civil court that the Controller holds, how costs work, review and setting aside of ex parte orders, curing irregularities, directions, the hearing that must precede adverse discretion, and correction of clerical errors. Mention of the inventor (18.05) has its own article.
The Manual is the Patent Office's guidance and does not have the force of law; the Patents Act, 1970 and the Patents Rules, 2003 as now in force prevail. The Office revises its manuals, so check the current version on ipindia.gov.in.
The Controller has the powers of a civil court on summoning, discovery, affidavits, commissions, costs, review and setting aside ex parte orders. Before any adverse use of discretion a party must be heard. Review and setting aside are sought within one month, with one further month possible. Rule 137, which the Manual cites for curing irregularities, was amended in 2024, and the rule now prevails.
Civil-court powers (18.01) and costs (18.02)
Under section 77, in proceedings before him the Controller has the powers of a civil court trying a suit, on summoning and examining witnesses on oath, requiring discovery and production of documents, receiving evidence on affidavit, issuing commissions, awarding costs, reviewing his own decision, setting aside an ex parte order, and any other prescribed matter. See sections 77 and 78.
On costs, the Manual says an order for costs is executable as a decree of a civil court and costs may be awarded in all proceedings as the Controller considers reasonable. The amount in any matter listed in the Fourth Schedule cannot exceed the scheduled sum. The Controller may also award compensatory costs in a proceeding he thinks false or vexatious. The practical consequence for parties is to plead on facts and documents, and never to raise grounds that cannot be supported.
Review and setting aside an ex parte order (18.03)
A person aggrieved by an order from which no appeal is allowed, or from which an appeal is allowed but not preferred, may apply for review on three kinds of ground: new and important matter or evidence that could not with due diligence have been produced earlier, a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or another sufficient reason. The Manual's practice points are these:
- The application goes to the Controller within one month from communication of the decision, or within a further period not exceeding one month on a request.
- It carries a statement of grounds.
- If another person is concerned, the Controller forwards a copy of the application and statement to that person.
- An application to set aside an ex parte order follows the same one-month, plus-one-month pattern, with a statement of grounds.
The live rule post agrees: rule 130 makes the application in Form 24 within one month, with the Controller able to allow a further period of up to one month on a Form 4 request. Fee amounts come from the First Schedule as substituted in 2024, not from the Manual.
If you are considering review, or an adverse order has just been communicated, our patent hearing support team can examine the order and the grounds.
Petition to obviate an irregularity (18.04)
The Manual says that a document for the amendment of which the Act makes no special provision may be amended, and an irregularity in procedure that the Controller considers can be cured without harming anyone may be corrected on terms he directs. It cites rule 137 and a decision, Nippon Steel Corporation v. Union of India, as cited in the Manual. The Patents (Amendment) Rules, 2024 added a sub-rule (2) to rule 137 that lists matters to which the power does not apply, such as certain time limits; the Act and Rules as now in force prevail, so check rule 137 before relying on this route for a missed time limit, and see rule 138 for the extension power as now in force.
Directions not otherwise prescribed (18.06)
The Manual says that where proper prosecution of a proceeding requires a party to perform an act, file a document or produce evidence for which no provision exists, the Controller may require it by written notice. Where a party wishes to be heard or not heard, he may be asked to give a written statement within the time specified. This is rule 128, covered in rules 128 to 129A.
Discretion, hearing and adjournment (18.07)
This is the paragraph applicants cite most often. The Manual says:
- Before acting adversely to a party, the Controller must give an opportunity of being heard. Discretion must be exercised with care and not arbitrarily, and the reasons are recorded in the file. This does not apply to actions that follow directly from the Act and Rules.
- A party who wants a hearing should ask at least ten days before the time-limit for the proceeding expires.
- The Controller ordinarily gives ten days' notice of a hearing before exercising adverse discretion.
- A party may ask for an adjournment with reasonable cause and the prescribed fee at least three days before the hearing.
- The Controller may adjourn not more than twice, and each adjournment is not more than thirty days.
These match the live rule post on rules 128 to 129A, which also confirms the fee head in the First Schedule. For the statutory text, see sections 79 to 81.
Clerical errors (18.08)
The Controller may correct a clerical error in a patent, specification, application or register entry, on a written request by any person interested with the prescribed fee, or without a request. If he acts on his own, he gives notice and a hearing to the patentee or applicant and others concerned. If a correction would materially alter the meaning or scope of a document, notice is published in the Official Journal and any person interested may oppose. The request must include a copy of the document with the corrections clearly highlighted, and the opposition follows the opposition-rule procedure without the Opposition Board stage.
Checklist table
| Situation | What the Manual says | What you do |
|---|---|---|
| Adverse order, no appeal preferred | Review on new evidence, apparent error or other sufficient reason | Apply within one month; ask for one more month if needed |
| Order passed in your absence | Set-aside application on the same time pattern | File with a statement of grounds |
| Curable procedural slip | Controller may cure if no one is harmed | Check rule 137(2) first, then petition |
| Discretion likely to go against you | Hearing after ordinarily ten days' notice | Ask for a hearing ten days before the time-limit expires |
| Hearing date unsuitable | One adjournment on reasonable cause | Ask at least three days ahead; allow for the fee |
| Typographical error in a record | Correction on request or on notice | Annex a highlighted copy and pay the fee |
A worked example
Nimbus Optics Pvt Ltd's application is refused in its absence because its agent did not receive the hearing notice. Nimbus applies within one month on Form 24 with a statement that the notice went to an outdated address for service. The Controller sets aside the ex parte order and gives a fresh hearing on ten days' notice. Separately, Nimbus finds that a typing slip in its abstract changed a figure; it files a correction request with a highlighted copy and the fee, and the correction is made after notice to those concerned.
Common lapses
- Missing the one-month review window.
- Using rule 137 for something rule 137(2) now excludes.
- Not asking for a hearing before a time-limit expires.
- Asking for an adjournment late or without cause.
- Presenting a substantive amendment as a clerical correction.
Need help with review or hearing?
A decision in the Controller's office is easiest to fix in the first weeks. If you have received an adverse order, a hearing notice or an irregularity to cure, see our patent hearing support page.
Key takeaways
- The Controller has civil-court powers, including costs, review and setting aside ex parte orders.
- Review and set-aside applications are made within one month, with up to one more month.
- Adverse discretion requires a hearing, ordinarily after ten days' notice.
- Rule 137 was amended in 2024; check it before relying on an irregularity petition.
- Clerical corrections that change meaning or scope are published and may be opposed.
Read next
- Chapter 18: mention of inventor
- Chapter 10: post-grant opposition, Board and hearing
- Chapters 19 and 21: services, affidavits and power of attorney
- Rule 130: review and setting aside
Disclaimer: Based on the manuals and guidelines published by the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks that are named in the article, as consulted on 4 October 2026. They are guidance and do not have the force of law; the Patents Act, 1970 and the Patents Rules, 2003 as amended (including the 2024 amendment rules) prevail, and the current versions on ipindia.gov.in should be checked. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.