Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Inderraj And Company (A Partnership ... vs Principal Secretary Food And Drug ... on 9 January, 2020

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

                                   1                               WP-26476-2019
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                   WP-26476-2019
 (INDERRAJ AND COMPANY (A PARTNERSHIP FIRM) THR. MR. DEVENDRA SINGH RAJPAL S/O MR.
   JOGINDER SINGH RAJP Vs PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION AND
                                      OTHERS)

2
Indore, Dated : 09-01-2020

      Shri Amar Choudhary, learned counsel for the Petitioner.
      Heard.
      The petitioner being a dealer has filed the present petition
seeking writ against respondent nos.3 and 4 that they be directed to

supply the medicines and drugs manufactured by thim.

The petitioner has submitted a legal notice to respondent nos.1 and 2 in light of Section 28 of the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 2013 which reads as under;

"28. Manufacturer, distributor or dealer not to refuse sale of drug- Subject to the provisions of the Drug and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940) and the rules made thereunder,
(a) no manufacturer or distributor shall withhold from sale or refuse to sell to a dealer any drug without good and sufficient reasons;
(b) no dealer shall withhold from sale or refuse to sell any drug available with him to a customer intending to purchase such drug."

The petitioner is a dealer of respondent nos.3 and 4 and despite that they are not supplying the drugs manufactured by them for which he has served legal notice to them and thereafter approached this Court seeking writ/order. According to the petitioner, respondent nos.3 and 4 are statutorily bound to supply drugs under Section 28 2 WP-26476-2019 the Act. Hence, a writ can not be issued to them by this Court.

Dealership between petitioner and respondent nos.3 and 4 is a purely commercial contract between two private parties and if the respondents are not supplying drug, writ can not be issued. In the case of purely commercial contract, interfere by High Court in writ petition is not permissible. The petition is misconceived and the same is hereby dismissed.


                                                        (VIVEK RUSIA)
                                                            JUDGE


   amit
          Amit
Amit      Kumar
          2020.01.13
Kumar     10:27:40
          +05'30'