MANMOHAN SINGH, J.

1. The plaintiffs have filed the above mentioned two suits for permanent injunction restraining infringement of Indian Patent No. 203937 and for damages against the defendants. The invention claimed by the plaintiffs inter alia for the treatment of cancer.

2. By way of this common order, I propose to decide the pending injunction applications filed by the plaintiffs under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC in both the matters. The first suit was filed in November, 2009. The second suit was filed in April 2013 on the basis of fresh cause of action. The suit patent remains the same.

3. Both suits are quia time actions. The first suit, being CS No. 2303 of 2009, was filed against the defendants namely (i) Mr. JD Joshi, Director of defendant No. 2 and M/s MJ Chempharm Private Limited (now known as BDR Lifesciences Private Limited) as the plaintiffs have reasonable apprehension that the defendants are going to launch the generic product which would infringe the claims of IN 203937 and they may violate the exclusive rights of the plaintiffs granted under Section 48 of the Indian Patents Act, 1970.

4. Common facts as per plaints:

(i) Plaintiff No. 1, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company is a company incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA founded under its present name in the year 1989 as a result of a merger between two pharmaceutical companies namely, Bristol-Myers Company founded in 1887 by William McLaren Bristol and John Ripley Myers and Squibb Corporation founded by Edward Robinson Squibb in 1858.

(ii) Plaintiff No. 2, Bristol-Myers Squibb India Private Limited, is a private limited company incorporated in 2004 and is a subsidiary of plaintiff No. 1 and markets pharmaceutical products in the domestic market.

(iii) Plaintiff No. 1 along with its subsidiaries is a leading biopharmaceutical company dedicated to discovering, developing and delivering innovative medicines that help patients prevail over serious diseases. The plaintiffs have a strong presence in various therapeutic areas including cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, psychiatric disorders, Alzheimer's disease, hepatitis, HIV/AIDS and rheumatoid arthritis.

(iv) Plaintiff No. 1 is the exclusive owner of DASATINIB and its pharmaceutically acceptable salts, solvates, isomers and prodrugs which is covered by the claims of IN 203937 in India. Plaintiff No. 1 patent 203937 is valid and subsisting and has a term of 20 years from 12th April, 2000 in India. Plaintiff No. 1, enjoys patent protection for the said patent in several other countries such as United States, Australia, New Zealand, Japan etc.

(v) DASATINIB which is the INN name of N-(2-chloro-6-methylphenyl)-2-[[6-[4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazinyl]-2-methyl-4-,pyrimidinyl]amino]-5-thiazolecarboxamide) is an anti-cancer molecule used in the treatment of adults with chronic, accelerated, or myeloid or lymphoid blast phase chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy including imatinib, as well as, in the treatment of adults who have a particular form of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) called Philadelphia chromosomepositive (Ph+) ALL. In both the suits I.A. No. 11344 of 2014 and I.A. No. 11336 of 2014 have been filed stating that the plaintiff No. 1 has assigned its rights, titles, interests in the suit patent by virtue of Assignment Deed dated 1st December, 2012 in favour of Bristol Myers Squibb Ireland and its request filed on 7th November, 2013 is pending. (Both the applications have been allowed by separate orders passed and assigning party is impleaded as plaintiff No.3 in the suits).

5. It is claimed that Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML), one of the most common forms of leukemia, arises from the excessive production of abnormal stem cells in the bone marrow, which eventually suppress the production of norm