Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.

Ia No.5262/2019 (of the defendant no.1 under Order VII Rule 11 CPC)

1. The counsel for the defendant no.1 states that the plaintiff has no cause of action against the defendant no.1; the cause of action pleaded against the defendant no.1 is some promotion material on which the name of the defendant no.1 does not appear and a transcript of a conversation, which the defendant no.1 denies.

2. On the basis of denial of the cause of action pleaded in the plaint, the plaint cannot be rejected.

3. I have however enquired from the counsel for the defendant no.1, whether the defendant no.1 is willing to make a statement that the defendant no.1, during the validity of the patent, will not deal in any drug infringing patent No.291100, under the name "RAPIFER" or under any other name.

4. The counsel for the defendant no.1 states that he has instructions from the defendant no.1 to make such a statement binding the defendant No.1.

5. The counsel for the plaintiff states that in view of the statement, the suit, insofar as against the defendant no.1 can be decreed for permanent injunction in terms of prayer paragraphs 45(a) and (b) of the plaint dated 17th March, 2019.