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

2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 21054

$~40

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

CS(COMM) 347/2024

HELSINN HEALTHCARE SA & ANR.

..... Plaintiffs

Through:

Mr. Sudhir Chandra Aggarwal, Sr.

Adv. with Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr.

Dhruv Anand, Ms. Nimrat Singh, Mr.

Dhananjay Khanna, Ms. Udita Patra

& Mr. Sampurna Sanyal, Advs.

versus

HETERO HEALTHCARE LIMITED

..... Defendant

Through:

Mr. Ajay Sahni, Mr. Ankit Sahni &

Mr. Chirag Ahluwalia, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

Advocates:
DHRUV ANAND

ORDER

% 30.04.2024 I.A. 9525/2024 (Exemption from filing certified, clear copies of documents)

1. Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Applicant shall file legible, clear, and original copies of the documents on which the applicant may seek to place reliance before the next date of hearing.

3. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of.

I.A. No.9524/2024 (seeking leave to file additional documents)

1. The present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff under Order 11 Rule 1(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) as applicable to commercial suits under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 seeking to place on record additional documents.

2. The plaintiff, if it wishes to file additional documents at a later stage, shall do so strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the DHC (Original Side) Rules, 2018.

3. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of.

I.A. No.9523/2024 (Order XI Rule 1, 3 & 5 of the CPC)

1. This application has been filed on behalf of plaintiffs seeking discovery, production and inspection of defendant’s documents.

2. Issue notice. Notice accepted by the counsel for defendant. Reply, if any, be filed within three weeks with advance copy to the counsel for plaintiffs, who may file rejoinder thereto, if so desired, before the next date of hearing.

I.A. No.9527/2024 (exemption from instituting pre-litigation mediation)

1. Having regard to the facts of the present case and in light of the judgement of Division Bench of this Court in Chandra Kishore Chaurasia v. R.A. Perfumery Works Private Ltd., FAO (COMM) 128/2021, exemption from attempting pre institution mediation is allowed.

2. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

I.A. No.9526/2024 (seeking extension of time for filing court fee)

1. This application has been filed by plaintiffs seeking extension of time for filing court fee.

2. Counsel for plaintiffs undertakes to file court fee within a period of one week from today.

3. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.

CS(COMM) 347/2024

1. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

2. Upon filing of process fee, issue summons to the defendant by all permissible modes. Summons shall state that the written statement be filed by the defendant within 30 days from the date of receipt of summons. Along with the written statements, the defendant shall also file affidavit of admission/denial of plaintiffs’ documents, without which the written statement shall not be taken on record. Liberty is given to plaintiffs to file a replication within 30 days of the receipt of the written statement. Along with the replication, if any, filed by the plaintiffs, affidavits of admission/denial of documents filed by the defendant, be filed by plaintiffs, without which the replication shall not be taken on record. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.

3. List before the Joint Registrar for marking of exhibits on 2nd August

2024.

4. It is made clear that any party unjustifiably denying documents would be liable to be burdened with costs.

I.A. 9522/2024 (under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC)

1. This application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC, seeking ex parte ad interim injunction is part of the accompanying suit seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining defendant from infringement of plaintiffs’ right in suit patent No.426553 (hereinafter referred to as “suit patent”) and restraining them from manufacturing, selling, promoting or dealing with defendant’s products under the brand name ‘NETUPIN’.

2. Plaintiff no.1 is a Swiss pharmaceutical group, while plaintiff no. 2 is an Indian incorporated company, being the exclusive licensee of plaintiff no.1. The suit patent was granted in “Compositions and methods for treating Centrally Mediated Nausea and Vomiting”, with the following details:

3. The suit patent is valid and will expire on 18th November 203




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
whatsapp-icon Back to top