Eli Lilly And Company And ANR. v. Natco Pharma Limited And ANR.
$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 183/2020 ELI LILLY AND COMPANY AND ANR.
..... Plaintiffs Through:
Mr. Pravin Anand, Ms. Prachi Agarwal, Ms. Ridhie Bajaj and Ms. Elisha Sinha, Advocates.
versus NATCO PHARMA LIMITED AND ANR.
..... Defendants Through:
Mr. G. Nataraj, Mr. Shashikant Yadav and Mr. Rahul Bhujbal, Advocates.
Ms. Hetu Arora Sethi, ASC, GNCTD with Mr. Arjun Basra, Advocate for IFSO, SPl. Cell, Delhi Police.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R
% 13.05.2024
1. The Plaintiffs' present suit pertains to Indian Patent bearing No. IN 297760. Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants are indulging in infringing activities in relation to the suit patent.
2. However, Mr. G. Nataraj, counsel for the Defendants, on the other hand, on instructions, denies the allegations made in the suit. He nonetheless states that Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 will not be launching any product containing Abemaciclib till the expiry of the suit patent i.e. 15th December, 2029 or until it is invalidated.
3. Mr. Nataraj also states that Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have not commercially launched any product of any kind in relation to Abemaciclib The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/05/2024 at 11:59:56
till date.
4. Furthermore, Mr. Nataraj states that Defendant No. 1 reserves all their rights its rights in law, including the provisions of Section 107A of the Patents Act, 1970 to carry out such activity in relation to the development and submission of the information in India or elsewhere where the law provides for, or mandates the submission of such information and material and data.
5. In light of the aforenoted statement made by Mr. Nataraj, Mr. Anand states that no further directions are being sought against Defendant No. 3 and the suit can be disposed of. However, he clarifies that the Plaintiffs reserve their right to take appropriate action, in case the need so arises in any time in future.
6. The aforenoted statement made by Mr. Nataraj shall bind the Defendants and the suit is decreed in the above terms.
7. In the event of any breach of the aforenoted terms of settlement, by either party, parties shall have all rights and remedies, as are available in law.
8. In light of the fact that the suit is being resolved on amicable terms, Mr. Anand's request for refund of Court fees is accepted. Registry is directed to refund full Court fees to the Plaintiff.
9. With the above directions, the suit is disposed of. SANJEEV NARULA, J MAY 13, 2024 nk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/05/2024 at 11:59:56