Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Bayer Healthcare Llc vs Msn Laboratories Private Limited on 22 September, 2022

Author: Navin Chawla

Bench: Navin Chawla

                    $~18
                    *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                    +    CS(COMM) 660/2022
                         BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC
                                                                       ..... Plaintiff
                                       Through: Mr.Pravin Anand, Mr.Dhruv Anand,
                                                Ms.Udita Patro, Ms.Swati Jain &
                                                Ms.Nimrat Singh, Advs.

                                                versus

                             MSN LABORATORIES PRIVATE LIMITED
                                                                                    ..... Defendant
                                                Through:      Mr.G. Nataraj, Mr.Ankur Vyas &
                                                              Mr.Shashikant Yadav, Advs.

                             CORAM:
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
                                               ORDER

% 22.09.2022 I.A. 15576/2022

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. This is an application filed on behalf of the plaintiffs seeking leave to file additional documents, which are not in the power, possession, control or custody of the plaintiff at the moment.

3. The plaintiffs may file the additional documents strictly in accordance with the provisions of the law.

4. The application stands disposed of.

5. Issue Notice. Notice is accepted by G. Nataraj, the learned counsel on behalf of the defendant.

6. Let reply to the application be filed within a period of four weeks of receipt of notice. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of four weeks thereafter.

7. List before the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 14th December 2022.

8. This is an application filed by the plaintiff seeking extension of time to deposit the Court Fees.

9. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the plaintiff is directed to deposit the Court Fees within a period of one week.

10. The application is disposed of.

11. The learned counsel for the defendant has entered appearance. After hearing the parties, it is clear that there is no possibility of an amicable settlement being arrived at between the parties. Even otherwise, grant of an ad-interim order has been prayed for by the plaintiff.

12. Accordingly, the plaintiff is exempted from instituting pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. CS(COMM) 660/2022

13. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

14. Issue summons. Summons is accepted by Mr. G. Nataraj, the learned counsel on behalf of the defendant.

15. Written statement to the plaint be filed within a period of 30 days. Along with the written statement, the defendant shall also file the affidavit(s) of admission/denial of the documents of the plaintiff, without which the written statement shall not be taken on record.

16. Liberty is given to the plaintiff to file replication within a period of 15 days of the receipt of the written statement. Along with the replication, if any, filed by the plaintiff, the affidavit of admission/denial of documents of the defendant be filed by the plaintiff, without which the replication shall not be taken on record. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.

17. List before the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 14th December, 2022 for completion of pleadings.

18. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by Mr. G. Nataraj, the learned counsel on behalf of the defendant. He prays for and is granted a period of one week to file reply. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of one week thereafter.

19. List on 6th October 2022, when another suit, being CS (COMM) 343/2019, wherein the plaintiff has claimed rights on the basis of the same patent, is listed for further hearing.

20. The learned counsel for the defendant submits that the defendant has not yet launched its product and undertakes to maintain status quo in that regard till there is a decision on the interim applications filed in the present suit as also in the suit referred to hereinabove.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J SEPTEMBER 22, 2022/rv Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHALOO BATRA Signing Date:23.09.2022 03:41:14