IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
H. Lundbeck A/S - Appellant
Versus
Symed Labs Limited - Respondent
CS(COMM) 103 of 2021 & I.A. 3178 of 2021, I.A. 3179 of 2021, I.A. 3180 of 2021, I.A. 3181 of 2021, I.A. 7368 of 2021 and I.A. 7369 of 2021
Decided On : 04-06-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. settlement terms regarding the patent. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's approval of settlement validity. (Para 4 , 5 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. entitlement for court fees refund. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. lawful agreement terms under order xxiii rule 3. (Para 9 , 12) |
(Video-Conferencing)
I.A.7369/2021 (exemption)
1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is disposed of.
I.A.7368/2021 (under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC)
3. This is a joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), for decreeing of the suit in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties. The terms of settlement have been set out in para 2 of the application which is, for ready reference, reproduced thus:
"2. That the Parties have amicably resolved the present dispute regarding the Indian Patent No. 227963 filed against the Defendant, on the basis of the following terms: -
i. The Defendant acknowledges the validity of the Indian Patent No. 227963 during its subsistence.
ii. The Defendant undertakes that it will not be commercially launching any product, including but not limited to Vortioxetine and/or Vortioxetine Hydrobromide violating the suit patent IN 227963 (hereinafter, `IN `963 patent') during its subsistence.
iii. That the Defendant undertakes that it will furnish a statement to the Plaintiffs and their counsel, every 6 months, starting from the date on which the settlement is recorded and until the subsistence of the IN `963 patent, containing the particulars and quantities of Vortioxetine and/or Vortioxetine Hydrobromide supplied/to be supplied to third parties whether in the domestic market or by export for R&D purposes prescribed under S. 107A of The Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter, `Patents Act').
iv. That the Defendant undertakes that at all times and until the subsistence of the IN'963 patent, the Defendant will obtain declarations/and undertakings from all third-party customers that such purchase/sale/export of Vortioxetine and/or Vortioxetine Hydrobromide is for the purposes prescribed under S. 107A of the Patents Act and provide the same to the Plaintiffs and their counsel.
v. That the Defendant further undertakes that, going forward and till the subsistence of the Indian Patent No. 227963, it will supply Vortioxetine and/or Vortioxetine Hydrobromide to only those entities which will provide them the information on the quantities of Vortioxetine and/or Vortioxetine Hydrobromide required for regulatory purposes under the laws of their country and/or any other country where they are applying for regulatory approval, whichever is applicable. That upon obtaining the said information, the Defendant will provide the same to the Plaintiffs and their counsel.
vi. That the Defendant further undertakes that if, during the subsistence of the Indian Patent No. 227963, it is discovered that any of the parties to whom the Defendant has supplied the product Vortioxetine and/or Vortioxetine Hydrobromide, are commercializing the product, the Defendant will promptly inform the Plaintiffs and their counsel along with requisite proof of such commercialization. Further, the Defendant would also stop the supply of the product to such party immediately and provide a confirmation thereof in writing to the Plaintiffs and their counsel.
vii. That the Defendant further undertakes that all communications to be made by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs and their counsel, in writing, in compliance of the aforesaid terms, would be at their respective postal addresses or email addresses, mentioned below:
a) H. Lundbeck A/S Plaintiff No. 1
Ottiliavej 9
2500 Valby
Denmark
E-mail address: jmp@lundbeck.com
b) Lundbeck India Private Limited Plaintiff No. 2
HM Towers, I Floor,
#58, Brigade Road, Kodihalli BD,
HAL II Stage, Bangalore
Karnataka - 560025
India.
E-mail address: MSAW@lundbeck.com
c) Anand and Anand Advocates of Plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2
First Channel Building,
Plot No. 17A, Film City, Sector 16A
The acknowledgment of patent validity and early settlement entitles the plaintiff to a full refund of court fees under CPC Order XXIII Rule 3.
Enforcement of settlement terms under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC and decreeing of the suit in terms of the settlement
Parties may settle disputes leading to a decree under Order XXIII, Rule 3 of the CPC, provided the terms are clear and binding.
Mutual settlement of disputes allows parties to withdraw claims under Order XXIII Rule 3, leading to court decreeing the suit based on agreed terms.
The court upheld the legality and validity of the Settlement Agreement, leading to the disposal of the suit.
The court's decision was influenced by the settlement agreement, which acknowledged the validity of the plaintiff's patent and the defendant's undertakings regarding the activities related to the pat....
Settlement terms enforceable under CP Code, where defendant acknowledges patent validity and agrees to refrain from infringing activities.
The court emphasized the importance of private settlement negotiations, allowing parties who reach such agreements to benefit from court fee refunds under Section 89 CPC.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.