Delhi High Court - Orders
Upl Limited vs Modern Insecticides Limited on 23 July, 2020
Author: Rajiv Shakdher
Bench: Rajiv Shakdher
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS (COMM) 268/2020
UPL LIMITED ....Plaintiff
Through Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Sr. Adv. with
Ms. Rajeshwari H. and Mr. Tahir
A.J., Advs.
versus
MODERN INSECTICIDES LIMITED .....Defendant
Through None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
ORDER
% 23.07.2020 [Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19] I.A. Nos. 5949/2020, 5950/2020 & 5951/2020
1. Allowed, subject to the plaintiff curing the deficiencies referred to in the captioned applications within five days of the lockdown qua this Court being lifted.
CS (COMM) No.268/2020 & I.A. No.5948/2020
2. Issue summons in the suit and notice in the captioned application via all modes including email.
3. The plaintiff has approached this Court as it is aggrieved by the steps taken by the defendant which has resulted in infringement of the plaintiff's patents i.e. IN 194225, IN 206130 and IN 244551.
CS (COMM) 268/2020 1/5 Signature Not Verified digitally signed byVIPIN KUMAR RAI signing date24.07.2020 08:313.1 It is the plaintiff's case that it is in the business of manufacturing insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, fumigant and rodenticides and in that process developed synergistic herbicide composition comprising Metsulfuron Methyl and Sulfosulfuron. The composition of the suit patent, according to the plaintiff, comprises, primarily of Metsulfuron Methyl and Sulfosulfuron as active ingredients together with excipients. 3.2 According to the plaintiff, this composition comprises Metsulfuron Methyl (5-10 wt%), Sulfosulfuron (70-80 wt%), inert fillers (1-20 wt%), polyoxyethylenesorbitan fatty acid ester (1-10 wt%), stabilizer (0.1-10 wt%), defoamer (0.1-1 wt%) and 0-10 wt% wetting and dispersing agents. 3.3 It is averred that the aforementioned composition is an invention, which is effective in controlling both narrow leaf (like grass) as well as broad leaf varieties of weeds.
3.4 The plaintiff is aggrieved that the defendant is exporting and intending to manufacture a product for the domestic market as well which is covered by IN 244551 and thereby infringing its statutory rights. 3.5 According to the plaintiff, the defendant's product has an identical composition. Assertions to that effect have been made in the plaint as well as in the captioned application. For the sake of convenience, the same are set forth hereafter:
CS (COMM) 268/2020 2/5 Signature Not Verified digitally signed byVIPIN KUMAR RAI signing date24.07.2020 08:31Claim of IN 244551 Product of defendant Comment Claim 1 A synergistic composition Metsulfuron methyl - Main elements comprising 5-10%w/w of 05.00% w/w Sulfosulfuron Present and fall metsulfuron methyl, 70-80% - 75.00% w/w within scope of w/w of sulfosulfuron, 1-25% claims w/w of inert fillers, 0.1-10% w/w of stabilizer,0.1-1% w/w of defoamer, 0.1-5% w/w of wetting agent, 0.10% w/w of dispersing agent and suspending agent.
Claim 1+12: Dispersant- Dispersant-sodium Present ....wherein the dispersant is a naphthalene sulphonate blend of sodium naphthalene (02.50% w/w); sulphonate; Lignosulfonate, Lignosulfonate (00.10% potassium poly carboxylate w/w), potassium poly carboxylate (04.00% w/w) Claim 1+14:Defoamer- Defoamer - tallow soap Present ....wherein the defoamer is (00.20% w/w) Silicone silicone defoamer and tallow defoamer -(00.10% w/w) soap Claim 1+15 .... Wherein the Wetting agent: Sodium Present wetting agent is dialkyl naphthalene sodiumdialkyl naphthalene sulfonate (00.10% w/w) 3- sulfonate, 3-EO alkyl ether EO alkyl ether sulphate sulphate (04.20% w/w) Claim 1+16:....Wherein the Suspending aid: Ethylene Present suspending agent is a blend of oxide propylene oxide Ethylene oxide propylene (01.70% w/w) Alpha alkyl oxide & Alpha alkyl (C10- (C10-C16) omega C16) omegahydroxypoly hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) (oxyethylene) mixture (00.10% w/w) Claim 1+13: ... wherein the Filler: Precipitated silica Present filler is selected from (Q.S. %) ammonium sulphate, precipitated silica or a mixture thereof CS (COMM) 268/2020 3/5 Signature Not Verified digitally signed byVIPIN KUMAR RAI signing date24.07.2020 08:31 3.6 It is also the plaintiff's case that it has obtained a license under Section 9(4) of the Insecticides Act, 1968.
4. Given the aforesaid circumstances, the plaintiff has approached this Court for necessary relief.
5. I have heard Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, learned senior counsel, who is instructed by Ms. Rajeshwari H., in support of the plaintiff's case.
6. In my view, at least at this stage, the plaintiff has established a prima facie case in its favour. The balance of convenience, it appears, is also in favour of the plaintiff as, I am told that, presently, the defendant has not commenced production in India.
7. To my mind, irreparable damage would be caused to the commercial and statutory interests of the plaintiff, if it is not protected, at this juncture.
8. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, the defendant, its directors, employees, officers and agents are restrained from manufacturing, selling, distributing, manufacturing, developing, importing, offering for sale, in any manner, directly or indirectly, commercializing or dealing in any product which infringes the plaintiff's registered patent i.e. IN 244551.
8.1 Besides this, the defendant will also disclose the quantity composition of the impugned product which it has, apparently, sold under the brand name 'FINISHER' and that which is lying at its manufacturing facility.
9. Renotify the matter on 04.09.2020.
CS (COMM) 268/2020 4/5 Signature Not Verified digitally signed byVIPIN KUMAR RAI signing date24.07.2020 08:3110. The plaintiffs will comply with the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the CPC within five days from receipt of a copy of this order.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J JULY 23, 2020 pmc/KK Click here to check corrigendum, if any CS (COMM) 268/2020 5/5 Signature Not Verified digitally signed byVIPIN KUMAR RAI signing date24.07.2020 08:31