In 2013 the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) issued several decisions, including the one discussed in this note, whereby it sought to raise the standard of non-obviousness of an invention in India by ruling that the legal fictitious person who serves as a reference for determining or evaluating whether an invention involves an inventive step and thus is non-obvious is Ms P Sita (a person skilled in the art, who has more than average knowledge of the state of the art and who also has some common sense). Such person is not at all ordinary and is not the same as Mr PHOSITA (the person having ordinary skill in the art) as referenced by US patent law and who is ordinary by definition.
I wrote an article on this which has been published by Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice published by the Oxford University Press. The Article is available here. I will share a detailed post on the implication of the decision in near future