There seems to exist a lacuna in terms of patenting of genetically modified crops or plants. This came to light after the decision by the Indian Judiciary in the Monsanto Case. Hybridisation was the principal approach employed by farmers and cultivators, till a few decades ago, around the world to obtain desired output from plants with specified desirable characteristics. However, this approach can only be employed when the plants involved are of the same species or are quite closely related, not to mention the time it takes to complete the full process. To overcome this barrier, genetically engineered plants were created. Scientists have successfully transmitted desirable characteristics of one plant to another by manipulating plant DNA, despite the fact that the two plants may be of different species. This advancement can be used greatly to our advantage. Nevertheless, courts have historically been less than generous in terms of granting patents for hybridised organisms. This article aims to examine the lacuna so created in light of the past literature and judgements by different jurisdictions and enlist some recommendations that can be employed.