Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Novartis AG – Appellant
Versus
MSN Laboratories Private Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. clarification of the dop's intent and compliance with patent laws. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. defendant's manufacturing license status and implications. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. defendant's obligation to notify the plaintiff before commencing manufacturing. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. decree issued based on current terms without merit consideration. (Para 12) |
| 5. court's ordering of next procedural steps and case closure. (Para 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present suit has been filed seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of Indian Patent No.237430, damages, rendition of accounts, delivery up etc. The details of the said patent are as under:
| Patent No. | : | IN 237430 |
| Title | : | Inhibitors of Tyrosine Kinases |
| Date of filing | : | 04th July, 2003 |
| Date of Expiry | : | 04th July, 2023 |
3. Pursuant to the directions issued vide previous orders dated 20th May, 2022 and 11th May, 2022, the Department of Pharmaceuticals, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers (hereinafter as `DOP') has filed an affidavit clarifying its position. As per the said affidavit, for various reasons including for enhancing supply of local manufactured pr
The Government's Public Notice regarding local drug manufacturers does not imply authorization to infringe patent rights, clarifying its non-involvement under the Patents Act.
The government notice for local manufacturing does not authorize infringement of patent rights, clarifying its intent under the Patents Act, ensuring that specific claims retain their novelty despite....
The court ruled that government notices do not confer rights to infringe patents and acknowledged the defendant’s commitment not to engage in infringing activities until patent expiration.
Acknowledgment of patent rights by the Defendants and their undertaking not to infringe, permissible use for research and development under Section 107-A of the Patent Act, 1970
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to issue a permanent injunction against patent infringement based on the Defendant's undertaking and lack of manufacture o....
Validity of specific patents is upheld while assessing distinctions between coverage and disclosure, emphasizing protection of intellectual property rights against infringement.
Intellectual Property right - Infringement of Indian patents - It is also a well settled position in law that damages are entirely insufficient as panacea for holder of a valid patent, which is infri....
The court granted a permanent injunction against defendants for using a deceptively similar trademark, affirming the plaintiff's established rights over their well-known trademarks.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
