An article is distinguished not only by its utility but also by its visual appeal which too usually play an important role in shaping the buyers preference for the article. Therefore, the design of an article and even design of its packaging is important from the commercial viewpoint.

Since the enactment of the Design Act, 1911 considerable progress has been made in the field of science and technology. The legal system of the protection of industrial design requires to be made more efficient in order to ensure effective protection to registered design. It is also essential to promote design activity in order to promote the design element in an article of production. The Design Act, 2000, after repealing the Act of 1911 aims at the protecting the design in India and bringing the Indian law at par with International law.

A design can be registered only when it is new or original and not previously published in India. A design would be registrable if the pattern though already known is applied to new article. For example, the shape of teddy bear if applied to school bag would be registrable. It is necessary that the design must be new with respect to the class of the article to which it has been applied. A combination of previously known designs can be registered if the combination produces a new visual appeal.

The novelty or originality is to be judged on the evidence of expert in the trade. An expert who is aware of what is common trade knowledge and usage in the class of goods to which the design is applied would be the once entitled to pass the verdict on the novelty and originality. The design must appeal to and judged solely by the eye. The visual appeal of the article must be to the eye of the customer.

The design must not be previously published in India. To constitute publication, a design must be available to the public or it has been shown or disclosed to some person who is not bound to keep it secret. The private or the secret use or an experimental use of a design will not constitute publication by prior use. In the case of Wimco Limited versus Meena Match Industries, the High Court held that the disclosure even to one person is sufficient to constitute publication