SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Kar) 249

H.L.DATTU
MEDREICH STERILAB LTD. – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates:
B.V.ACHARYA, M.DODDAMANI, N.DEVDAS, SATISH

H. L. DATTU, J.

( 1 ) PETITIONER is a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the manufacture of various Pharmaceuticals preparations

( 2 ) THE second respondent-Drug Controller licensing Authority, is the competent authority to issue licence under the provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 ('the act 'for short) and the Rules framed thereunder. He has issued a licence to the petitioner company for manufacture of pharmaceutical preparations, apart from others, a drug formulation by trade name "augmentin duo Syrup" (Amoxicillian and Clavulanic acid) and the said licence is renewed from time to time. It is the claim of the petitioner company that the Augmentin range of preparations manufactured by the petitioner-company is sold all over the country.

( 3 ) THE cause of action pleaded in the petition for the petitioner-company to approach this Court is the show cause notice issued by the second respondent to the petitioner -company dated 7-12-2002 under rule 85 (2) of Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, ('rules' for short) inter alia directing it to show cause, why action as per law should not be taken against it, to cancel, suspend or revoke the lic






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top