(R. Banumathi and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ.)
Reliance Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. _______________________ Petitioner;
v.
Genentech Inc. and Others _______________________ Respondent(s).
Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6203 of 2019, decided on March 8, 2019
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. In the suit(s) filed by respondent nos. 1 to 3-plaintiffs seeking permanent injunction, interlocutory application filed by respondent nos. 1 to 3 was disposed of by the learned Single Judge permitting the petitioner to manufacture the drug-Transtu Rei subject to the conditions indicated thereon. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, the petitioner preferred appeal before the Division Bench. By the order dated 03.12.2018, the Division Bench fixed the date of hearing on 13th, 14th and 15th February, 2019. The order of the High Court dated 03.12.2018 reads as under:
“Matters received on transfer.
These appeals and cross appeals arise out of the common order which raises several issues.
Learned counsel for the parties state that the matter would require detailed hearing.
Re-list on 13th, 14th and 15th February, 2019.
We clarify that the appeal would be heard in entirety. However, if for any reason, hearing is adjourned, the application for interim relief filed in FAO (OS) No. 181/2016 by the appellant would be taken-up for consideration”.
2. When the matter came up before the Division Bench on 13.02.2019, the Division Bench directed that the dates already fixed would stand cancelled and directed the matters to be listed on 16.09.2019. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before us.
3. We have heard Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. Gopal Subramanium, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3 – plaintiffs.
4. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3 submitted that being aggrieved by the order of the Learned Single Judge permitting the petitioner to manufacture drug with certain conditions, the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have also filed FAO(OS) No. 227 of 2016 in which they have also prayed for suspension. Learned senior counsel for the respondents further submitted that respondent nos. 1 to 3-plaintiffs have no objection for disposal of all the appeals at an early date.
5. Having regard to the submissions, we request the High Court of Delhi to take up the appeals preferred by the petitioner as well as the appeals preferred by respondent nos. 1 to 3 at an early date and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within four months.
6. In case, the appeals are not heard and disposed of within the time, we request the High Court to take up interlocutory application(s) filed by both i.e. petitioner as well as respondents.
7. The special leave petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
———
