F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD Vs. CIPLA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO plaintiffs, namely, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. and OSI Pharmaceuticals Inc., have filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of patent, rendition of accounts, damages and delivery up through their duly constituted attorney, namely, Mr.Shivprasad Laud, against Cipla Ltd. Mumbai, having its office also at Delhi.

(2.) THE plaintiff No.1 Company claims that it is one of the world's leading research-focused healthcare groups in the fields of pharmaceuticals and diagnostics. It is stated in the plaint that for the purpose of research and development, the said plaintiff engages inter alia into collaborative agreements and alliances with numerous partners and invests approximately 7 billion Swiss Francs in such activities.

(3.) A specific statement has been made in para-7 of the plaint that plaintiff No.2 along with M/s Pfizer Products Inc. had applied for grant of patent in respect of drug Erlotinib and its process vide application No.537/DEL/1996 on 13th March, 1996. The Controller General of Patents, Trademarks and Designs, New Delhi, granted a certificate bearing Patent No.196774 (hereinafter referred as INRs.774 or suit patent) dated 23rd February, 2007 which has been recorded in the Register of Patents on 6 th July, 2007. The molecular name of patent is A NOVEL [6, 7-BIS(2- METHOXYETHOXY) QUINAZOLIN-4-YL]- (3-ETHYNYLPHENYL) AMINE HYDROCHLORIDE'. It is averred that the drug as well as the process of its manufacture is patented as per the provisions of the Patent Act, 1970 and entitled to their protection as such. The plaintiffs' product Erlotinib Hydrochloride Tablets (Tarceva), which was registered by the Central Drug Standard Control Organization, Directorate General of Health Services, Government of India vide Registration Certificate dated 23 rd December, 2005 is issued in the name of plaintiff No.1. It is also stated in the said paragraph that on 8th January, 2001, the plaintiff No.2 and the plaintiff No.1 had entered into a Development Collaboration and Licensing Agreement (the Licence Agreement) wherein the plaintiff No.1 has a licence to use, sell and offer for sale the licensed products including the drug Erlotinib, which is the subject matter of the present suit. The plaintiff No.1 is further licensed and authorized to cause enforcement of any intellectual property rights for any of their products.