Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.23 seconds)The Patents Act, 1970
Section 24A in The Patents Act, 1970 [Entire Act]
Multichannel (India) Limited, Rep. By ... vs Kavitalaya Productions Pvt., Limited, ... on 2 September, 1998
46. Of course, it is true, as laid down by a Division Bench
of this Court in 1998 (II) CTC 689 (MULTICHANNEL (INDIA) LTD. v. KAVITALAYA
PRODUCTIONS, it is well settled that only if the discretion is not exercised
applying the tests on the point, fairly or honestly or according to the rules
or reason and justice, then alone, the order can be reversed by the appellate
Court.
Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund vs Kartick Das on 20 May, 1994
(i) (1994) 4 SCC 225 (Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund v. Kartick
Das), wherein the Supreme Court laid down the following factors, which should
weigh with the Court, while a request for injunction comes up for
consideration :
The Drugs And Cosmetics Act, 1940
Wander Ltd. And Anr. vs Antox India P. Ltd. on 26 April, 1990
(ii) 1990 (Suppl.) SCC 727 (Wander Ltd. v. Antox India
P.Ltd.), in which the Supreme Court has observed as under :
Novartis Ag, Rep. By It'S Power Of ... vs Adarsh Pharma And Anr. on 28 April, 2004
(iii) When a similar issue is raised before this Court between
the same parties, in respect of another product, a learned single Judge has
granted interim injunction, which is reported in 2004 (29) PTC 108 (Novartis
AG v. Adarsh Pharma) as follows :
Intas Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. And Anr. vs Novaritis A.G., Schwarzwaldallee, ... on 20 December, 2004
This decision of the learned single Judge has been confirmed by a Division
Bench of this Court, reported in (2005) 1 M.L.J. 309 (INTAS LABORATORIES
PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD, v. NOVARTIS A.G., SCHWARZWALDALLEE).
1