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

1993 Supreme(Mad) 654

VENKATASWAMY
Dukes Pharma – Appellant
Versus
Government of India – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:Mr. Alagar, Mr. K. Jayachanan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The Order of the Court is as follows :-

In all these cases, though different Notifications are mentioned in the affidavits filed in support of these petitions, the sole question of law advanced before me being common, these writ petitions are disposed of by this common Order.

2.I shall set out at the appropriate place the common question of law that arises for consideration, after narrating the facts that are necessary for appreciating and understanding the issue before us.

3.Brief facts may now be noted. Except the petitioner in W.P. No. 8 of 1989 and first petitioner in W.P. No. 8885 of 1985, other petitioners are owners of factories wherein patent or proprietary medicines (hereinafter referred to as 'P.P. Medicines') are manufactured. They also allow other manufacturers of P.P. Medicines but do not own factories, to hire shift or shifts at their factories for manufacture of P.P. Medicines. Such manufacturers who do not own their own factories, but hire shift or shifts at the factories owned by others for manufacture of P.P. Medicines are called 'Loan Licensees'. Such type of Loan Licensees are recognised under Rules 69A and 74B of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. Th














































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