Sections 79 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.
These three short sections govern how proceedings run before the Controller. Section 79 says evidence is given by affidavit unless the Controller directs otherwise, and lets him take oral evidence or allow cross-examination. Section 80 gives an applicant a right to be heard before the Controller exercises a discretion adversely, if the applicant asks, and the proviso sets a ten-day advance request. Section 81 says the Controller need not hear anyone opposing an extension of time and no appeal lies from an order granting one. If you face a hearing, see our patent hearing support service.
s.79: evidence is by affidavit unless the Controller directs otherwise; he may take oral evidence or allow cross-examination where he thinks it right. s.80: before exercising adversely to the applicant any discretion, the Controller must give the applicant (for a patent or an amendment) an opportunity to be heard if the applicant so requires within the prescribed time; the request must reach him at least ten days in advance of the expiry of the time limit. s.81: an order granting an extension of time needs no hearing of an opponent and no appeal lies from it.
Amendments to know
The proviso to section 80 was inserted by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 (from 20 May 2003). Sections 79 and 81 are printed in their original form. The Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 and the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 did not change these sections. Section 81 refers to the Controller's power to extend time "under the provisions of this Act or the rules"; the extension powers themselves are found in the Rules and in the Act's other sections, and are not described here.
Section 79: evidence and the Controller's powers over it
"Subject to any rules made in this behalf, in any proceeding under this Act before the Controller, evidence shall be given by affidavit in the absence of directions by the Controller to the contrary, but in any case in which the Controller thinks it right so to do, he may take oral evidence in lieu of, or in addition to, evidence by affidavit, or may allow any party to be cross-examined on the contents of his affidavit."
- Default rule: evidence is by affidavit. That is the starting point in any proceeding before the Controller, for example an opposition or a hearing on an application.
- Controller's directions: he can direct otherwise.
- Oral evidence: where he thinks it right, he may take oral evidence "in lieu of, or in addition to" an affidavit.
- Cross-examination: he may allow a party to be cross-examined on the contents of his affidavit.
- Subject to rules: the Rules may add detail; they are not covered here.
The test for oral evidence and cross-examination is the Controller's own view of what is "right". The text gives no criteria.
Section 80: exercise of discretionary powers
"Without prejudice to any provision contained in this Act requiring the Controller to hear any party to the proceedings thereunder or to give any such party an opportunity to be heard, the Controller shall give to any applicant for a patent, or for amendment of a specification (if within the prescribed time the applicant so requires) an opportunity to be heard before exercising adversely to the applicant any discretion vested in the Controller by or under this Act:
Provided that the party desiring a hearing makes the request for such hearing to the Controller at least ten days in advance of the expiry of the time-limit specified in respect of the proceeding."
Take the elements one by one:
- Who is protected: "any applicant for a patent, or for amendment of a specification". The section names these two classes of applicants.
- What triggers it: the Controller is about to exercise a discretion "adversely to the applicant". This may be a refusal, a condition or another adverse use of a discretionary power.
- Condition: the applicant must require a hearing "within the prescribed time". The Rules fix that time.
- Duty: the Controller "shall give" an opportunity to be heard. It is mandatory once the applicant asks in time.
- Relation to other hearing provisions: "without prejudice to any provision ... requiring the Controller to hear any party". Hearing rights elsewhere in the Act, such as those in section 57 and section 61, stay intact.
- Proviso: "the party desiring a hearing makes the request ... at least ten days in advance of the expiry of the time-limit specified in respect of the proceeding." So the request must reach the Controller ten days before the time limit for the proceeding expires.
Drafting point: the proviso speaks of "the party desiring a hearing", while the main text speaks of "applicant"; the proviso uses a wider word. The text does not explain whether it extends the right to other parties, so read the right as the applicant's and apply the ten-day rule to the applicant's request.
| Rule | Source |
|---|---|
| Right to be heard before an adverse discretion | s.80, main text |
| Applicant must require it within the prescribed time | s.80, main text |
| Request at least ten days before expiry of the time limit | s.80, proviso |
| Hearing rights elsewhere in the Act are untouched | "Without prejudice" opening |
Section 81: extension of time
"Where under the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder the Controller may extend the time for doing any act, nothing in this Act shall be deemed to require him to give notice to or hear the party interested in opposing the extension, nor shall any appeal lie from any order of the Controller granting such extension."
- It concerns cases where the Controller may extend time, by the Act or the Rules.
- The Controller need not give notice to, or hear, a party who would oppose the extension.
- No appeal lies from an order granting the extension. The text says nothing about an order refusing an extension; the bar covers only an order granting it. Our later article on section 117A covers appeals generally.
Illustration (invented)
Tarun Biosciences Ltd. receives an examination report and a notice that the time limit for putting its application in order will expire on a certain date. It asks for a hearing, but sends the request to the Controller only five days before the date. The proviso to section 80 requires the request at least ten days in advance of the expiry of the time limit. The request is late, so the right to a hearing under that provision is at risk.
Had Tarun sent it twelve days ahead, the Controller would have had to give it an opportunity to be heard before exercising adversely any discretion, such as refusing the application. In the hearing, Tarun's evidence would be by affidavit unless the Controller directs otherwise, but the Controller might allow its scientist to be cross-examined on her affidavit under section 79.
Separately, if Tarun applies for more time and the Controller grants it, a rival cannot demand a hearing or appeal against that grant under section 81.
What the sections do not say
- They do not give the prescribed time under section 80; it is in the Rules.
- They do not list matters on which discretion is exercised.
- They do not say what the Controller must do on an applicant's late request.
- They do not provide a remedy for a refusal of an extension.
Need help getting your hearing right?
A late hearing request can cost you the right to be heard. Our patent hearing support team can track every deadline, file the hearing request ahead of time and prepare affidavits and submissions for the Controller.
Key takeaways
- Evidence before the Controller is by affidavit unless he directs otherwise; he may take oral evidence or allow cross-examination.
- An applicant for a patent or an amendment can require a hearing before an adverse exercise of discretion, within the prescribed time.
- The request must be made at least ten days before the expiry of the time limit.
- An extension of time can be granted without notice or hearing of an opponent, and no appeal lies from the grant.
Read next
- Sections 82 and 83: patented articles and general principles applicable to working
- Sections 77 and 78: Controller's civil court powers and correction of clerical errors
- Section 21: time for putting an application in order for grant
- Response to the first examination report (FER)
Disclaimer: Based on the Patents Act, 1970 as amended up to the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, as consulted on 1 October 2026. Forms, fees and time limits under the Patents Rules, 2003 change from time to time and are not covered here. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.