India’s Supreme Court upholds PepsiCo’s rights over Lay’s potato variety

Registration remains in force

India’s Supreme Court has upheld PepsiCo’s registration for the FL 2027 potato variety used to produce Lay’s chips, while confirming that statutory protections for individual farmers remain in force. According to Aaj Tak, the court declined to interfere with a Delhi High Court decision that had restored the company’s registration.

The ruling preserves PepsiCo’s breeder rights over FL 2027 under India’s Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001, commonly known as the PPVFR Act. PepsiCo had argued that the variety was protected under the legislation and that its commercial cultivation without authorization was therefore not permitted.

A bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran disposed of the case after concluding that no alteration to the Delhi High Court order was necessary. The decision gives PepsiCo continued legal recognition for the variety but does not grant the company an unrestricted ability to prevent individual farmers from handling seed produced on their farms.

Farmers retain seed-saving protections

The Supreme Court specifically referred to Section 39(1)(iv) of the PPVFR Act. Aaj Tak reported that the bench said any individual farmer in India is fully protected against legal action when exercising the rights covered by that provision.

Farmers may retain produce or seed from the protected variety, sow it again and sell it to one another. The restriction is that they cannot market such material as PepsiCo’s branded seed. This distinction allows traditional farm-level seed practices to continue while preserving the company’s rights over commercial branding and the formal registration of FL 2027.

PepsiCo also told the court during the hearing that it would not interfere with these statutory farmer rights. The company’s position and the court’s clarification narrow the practical scope of the dispute: the registration remains valid, but it cannot be used to eliminate the seed-saving and seed-selling protections expressly provided to individual farmers by law.

Dispute followed litigation involving Gujarat farmers

The challenge was brought by farmers’ rights activist Kavitha Kuruganti, who sought cancellation of PepsiCo’s registration. Her argument referred to the company’s earlier legal action against farmers in Gujarat over alleged infringement involving the potato variety. That litigation had placed the relationship between corporate plant-variety protection and customary agricultural practices at the center of the case.

The Supreme Court’s decision leaves the Delhi High Court’s resolution of the registration issue undisturbed. It therefore provides continuity for PepsiCo’s sourcing and processing arrangements for a potato variety associated with Lay’s production, while giving individual growers a clear statement that their statutory activities remain protected.

For potato producers and processors, the ruling separates two parts of the market. Registered breeder rights and branded seed remain protected, supporting the company’s control over its formally registered variety and brand identity. At the same time, individual farmers can save, replant and exchange or sell unbranded seed or produce within the boundaries of the PPVFR Act.

The judgment does not abolish PepsiCo’s rights or give farmers permission to sell seed under the company’s name. Instead, it confirms that both sets of rights operate simultaneously. The commercial value of FL 2027 to PepsiCo is preserved, while the legal protection available to individual Indian farmers is explicitly reaffirmed.