Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The trademark Roscilox is not of Ranbaxy and there is no brand ownership rights on the said trademark directly or indirectly in any manner by which it can be construed that Ranbaxy is the proprietor of the trademark.

4. The product list published by Ranbaxy in Form V makes mention of the price of the product Roscilox which is circulated amongst the stockists and distributors.

5. It is submitted that merely by publishing the product in the price list will not confer the product rights of the said product on Ranbaxy."

2.5 Subsequently, by demand-cum-show cause notice dated 20.01.2004, respondent no. 3 noted that the sample of Roscilox injection submitted by the appellant was owned and manufactured by M/s Oscar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Oscar Labs') and that Oscar Labs had amalgamated with M/s Shimal Investment Trading Company, presently known as Ranbaxy Holding Company Pvt. Ltd. It was alleged that Oscar Labs was fully owned and controlled by the appellant. It was alleged that the appellant had acted as the distributor of the said product and in nexus with Oscar Labs had violated the provisions of the DPCO 1995. Consequently, the appellant and Oscar Labs were liable to pay the overcharged amount along with interest. In response to the said notice, the appellant by its letter dated 30.01.2004, stated that the appellant did not control or own Oscar Labs at any point of time and it never had any nexus with Oscar Labs in any manner. The appellant further stated that it had never acted as distributor for Oscar Labs for Cloxacillin based formulations and it had only purchased the said formulations from Oscar Labs. It was also stated that Ranbaxy Holding Company Pvt. Ltd. was not connected with the appellant.

10. Mr Rajiv Mehra, learned Addl. Solicitor General appearing for the respondents contended that the appellant company had an interest in the brand name Roscilox and handed over a compilation of documents including printouts of various websites, which indicated that the appellant company and/or its affiliates owned the brand name Roscilox in territories outside India. The website of the appellant company also advertised that it had received a Nigerian award for Roscilox suspension (which was described as "Ranbaxy's Roscilox suspension"). The said compilation of documents also included orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Punjab & Haryana High Court in relation to income tax assessment of Oscar Labs and Ranbaxy Holding Company Pvt. Ltd. respectively. The same indicated that the appellant company was related to the said companies.

24. We are also unable to accept the contention of the appellant that the finding of the learned Single Judge that there is a prima facie nexus between the appellant and Oscar Labs is without any basis. The material placed on record clearly indicates that prima facie there is a nexus between Oscar Labs and the appellant. Although the brand name Roscilox is alleged to be owned by Oscar Labs, the website of the appellant company itself refers to a Nigerian award received in respect of "Ranbaxy's Roscilox suspension". The judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Ranbaxy Holding Company v. CIT: (2007) 208 CTR P&H 413 records the facts noted by the Assessing Officer which refers to Ranbaxy Laboratories and Oscar Pharmaceuticals Ltd. as companies of the Ranbaxy Group. The decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax v. Oscar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.: (2002) 83 ITD 408 (Chd.) indicates that during the years 1987- 88 to 1993-94 the appellant was manufacturing drugs on behalf of Oscar Labs. The print outs of certain websites also indicate that the appellant owns the brand Roscilox. The report by ORG-MARG, which is a reputed market research organization, also indicates Roscilox formulations to be a product of the appellant company. The trade literature also indicates that Ranbaxy (Pharma Marketing), was marketing Roscilox products. In addition, Oscar Labs is stated to have merged with M/s Shimal Investment Pvt. Ltd which is now known as Ranbaxy Holdings Company Pvt. Ltd. The learned Single Judge took note of the trade literature as well as the fact that Oscar Labs had merged with M/s Shimal Investments Pvt. Ltd. and concluded that prima facie there was a nexus between Oscar Labs and the appellant. In view of the same, we are unable to accept the contention that the finding of the learned Single Judge was without any basis or is in any manner erroneous. There is sufficient material on record to prima facie show a relationship between Oscar Labs and the appellant and in these circumstances it was for the appellant to explain the same.