Cipla Limited v. Novartis AG and Ors.

Cipla Limited v. Novartis AG and Ors. 2017 (70) PTC 80 (Del) Respondents (Novartis AG and Ors.) filed a suit for permanent injunction seeking to restrain the Appellant (Cipla Ltd.) from infringing its Patent. Along with the suit, Respondents had also filed an application for interim relief of temporary injunction during the pendency of the

CIPLA Limited v. CIPLA Industries Private Limited and Ors.

CIPLA Limited  v. CIPLA Industries Private Limited and Ors. 2017 (69) PTC 425 (Bom) Full Bench A Learned Single Judge of the High Court of Bombay vide order dated 26th April, 2016 expressed the view that decision of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Raymond Limited v. Raymond Pharmaceuticals Pvt.

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED V. CIPLA LIMITED

Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. v. Cipla Ltd. 2009 (39) PTC 347 (DEL) Facts of the Case: The trade mark ‘THEOBID’ was registered in the name of one Natco Fine Pharmaceuticals Private Limited for medicines. The said trade mark was assigned to the Plaintiff along with its goodwill vide a deed of assignment in 1998. Plaintiff

Novartis AG and Anr. v. Cipla Ltd.

Novartis AG and Anr. v. Cipla Ltd. I.A. No.24863/2014 IN CS(OS) No. 3812/2014 Date of decision: 09.01.2015 Delhi High Court Plaintiff held a Patent for INDACATEROL (for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease). Plaintiff filed a suit against the Defendant towards infringement of the said Patent. On 22nd October, 2014 the Defendant made a representation to the