Designs Act, 2000 – Overview
The Designs Act, 2000 governs the registration, protection, and enforcement of industrial designs in India. Enacted to replace the Designs Act, 1911, it aligns India’s legal framework with TRIPS requirements and introduces a modernized approach to aesthetic innovation.
Introduction and Objectives
Introduction and Objectives
The Act aims to:
- Protect novel and original aesthetic designs applied to industrial articles.
- Encourage industrial innovation and competitiveness.
- Prevent design piracy, imitation, and unfair commercial exploitation.
Case Reference:
Bharat Glass Tube Ltd. v. Gopal Glass Works Ltd. (2008) — The Supreme Court emphasized the Act’s objective to protect visual appeal and commercial distinctiveness of industrial products.
Key Definitions (Section 2)
- Design (Section 2(d)): Refers to features of shape, configuration, pattern, ornamentation, or composition of lines or colours applied to an article and judged solely by the eye.
ITC Ltd. v. Controller of Patents & Designs (2019) — The Calcutta High Court held that visual appeal, not functional value, is the essence of a design.
- Article: Any item to which the design is applied and manufactured.
- Original: A design not previously published or used in India before filing.
Functional Features Excluded
Crompton Greaves Ltd. v. Venus Instant Water Heater (2012) — Features dictated solely by function are not protectable.
Registration Process
- Section 4: Designs that are not new, are contrary to public order, or scandalous/obscene cannot be registered.
- Section 5: Applications must include prescribed fees and graphical representations.
- Sections 6–9: Registration is class-specific (Locarno Classification).
Once accepted, the applicant receives a certificate of registration.
Rotomac Pens Ltd. v. Milap Ltd. (1999)—Although based on the prior Act, the principle remains: registration provides statutory monopoly irrespective of actual manufacturing.
Rights and Duration
- Section 11: Copyright in a registered design lasts 10 years, extendable by an additional 5 years upon renewal.
- Section 14: Restoration revives rights from the date of restoration.
Holders gain the exclusive right to apply the design and prevent unauthorized commercial use.
Enforcement and Infringement
- Section 22 defines “piracy of a registered design.” Remedies include:
| Remedy | Provision |
| Damages up to ₹25,000 per infringement | Section 22(2)(a) |
| Injunction against further use | Section 22(2)(b) |
| Recovery of profits | Judicial discretion |
Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Aqualite Industries (2015)
The Delhi High Court held that substantial similarity — not exact replication — is enough to constitute infringement.
Cognizability & Police Involvement
- Offences under the Designs Act are civil in nature, not criminal.
- Police cannot register FIRs, investigate, or arrest in design infringement matters.
Enforcement requires:
- Civil suits
- Interim injunctions
- Court-directed searches or seizures (if warranted)
This was emphasized in multiple judicial pronouncements where courts refused to treat design disputes as criminal matters.
Notable Case Law Summary
| Case Name | Key Principle Established |
| Bharat Glass Tube v. Gopal Glass Works (SC, 2008) | Registration grants exclusive rights; validity cannot be casually challenged. |
| ITC Ltd. v. Controller of Patents & Designs (Cal HC, 2019) | Aesthetic appeal, not functionality, determines protectability. |
| Relaxo Footwear v. Aqualite (Del HC, 2015) | Test of substantial visual similarity applies. |
| Crompton Greaves v. Venus (Del HC, 2012) | Functional designs not protectable. |
International Alignment
The Act complies with TRIPS and adopts the Locarno Classification, enabling harmonized global protection and simplification of multi-jurisdictional filings.
Conclusion
India’s Designs Act (2000) serves as the key legal framework for safeguarding original visual aesthetics in industrial products, thereby encouraging market innovation. This law provides strong civil protection and legal remedies against copying or infringement.
However, design exclusivity is not automatic. Since enforcement is managed exclusively through the court system—and not by the police—the designer or business must initiate legal action (litigation). For this system to work, companies must prioritize the timely registration of their designs. Active, rigorous defense of these assets is essential to prevent unauthorized use and maintain complete control over their proprietary creativity.
