Madras High Court
Novartis Ag vs Tanmed Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd on 3 September, 2014
Author: S. Tamilvanan
Bench: S. Tamilvanan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 03.09.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S. TAMILVANAN C.S. No.357 of 2014 1.Novartis AG 2.Novartis Health Care Pvt. Limited rep. by its Power of Attorney Suyash Valanj 3.Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd. rep. by its Power of Attorney Amod J.Deo ... Plaintiffs v. Tanmed Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. 18, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Kodambakkam, Channai-600 024. ... Defendant Civil Suit is filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules of the High Court read with Order VII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure seeking a judgment and decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant by themselves or through their directors, group company or wings, associates, divisions, assigns in business, licensees, franchisees, agents, distributors and dealers from using, manufacturing, importing, selling, offering for sale, exporting, directly or indirectly dealing in pharmaceutical products, compound or formulation containing Vildagliptin alone or Vildagliptin + Metformin Hydrochloride in combination or Vildagliptin in combination with any other compound or formulation or in any other form as may amount to infringement of Indian Patent No.212815 of the first plaintiff and for delivery up of all the stock of infringing pharmaceutical formulations, compound or combinations comprising Vildagliptin alone and/or Vildagliptin in combination with Metformin Hydrochloride or any other compound or formulation available with the defendant to an authorised representative of the plaintiffs and for rendition of accounts of profits earned by the defendant for manufacture and sale of infringing pharmaceutical products, compound or formulation or combination containing Vildagliptin alone or Vildagliptin in combination in any form and a decree for the amount so found due may be passed or in the alternative damages be ascertained by this Court and a decree for damages as ascertained be passed in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendant. For Plaintiffs : Mr.Sathish Parasaran For Defendant : Mr.J.Antony Jesus JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel appearing for plaintiffs as well as the defendant.
2.The suit has been filed by plaintiffs seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendant by themselves or through their directors, group company or wings, associates, divisions, assigns in business, licensees, franchisees, agents, distributors and dealers from using, manufacturing, importing, selling, offering for sale, exporting, directly or indirectly dealing in pharmaceutical products, compound or formulation containing Vildagliptin alone or Vildagliptin + Metformin Hydrochloride in combination or Vildagliptin in combination with any other compound or formulation or in any other form as may amount to infringement of Indian Patent No.212815 relating to the first plaintiff and other reliefs.
3.When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for plaintiffs submitted that the suit itself could be decided, in view of the no objection raised by the defendant by way of filing affidavit in the Original Application. Para No.2 of the said affidavit reads as follows:
2....It is submitted that the defendant company has neither manufactured not intends to manufacture any formulation VILDAGLIPTIN till the plaintiffs' patent is valid and that the defendant company has no objection if the present suit is disposed of in terms of the affidavit and a decree of permanent injunction is passed in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendant....
4.Having considered the submission made by both the learned counsel, I find it just and reasonable to pass the decree in terms of the consensus arrived at between the parties. Accordingly, recording the S. TAMILVANAN,J.
vga said averments made in the affidavit dated 18.08.2014, filed by the defendant, the suit is decreed, in so far as prayer 'a' is concerned and in view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for plaintiffs not pressing the prayer 'b' & 'c', the suit is dismissed in so far as prayers 'b' and 'c' are concerned. Consequently, connected Original Application is closed. No order as to costs.
03.09.2014 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No vga C.S. No.357 of 2014