Merck Sharp And Dohme Corp. v. Sms Pharmaceuticals Limited

CS(COMM) 463/2020 & I.A. 9671/2020

Plaintiffs filed a suit seeking an injunction against the manufacture and sale of Sitagliptin products by the Defendant. The parties subsequently resolved their disputes through a settlement agreement dated September 15, 2023, which was recorded by the Court.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court - Orders
Case Number
CS(COMM) 463/2020 & I.A. 9671/2020
Judge(s)
Prathiba M. Singh

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Delhi High Court - Orders. Understanding the court's reasoning in Merck Sharp And Dohme Corp. vs Sms Pharmaceuticals Limited is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentCRA 185 of 2011

Sergi Transformers Explosion Prevention Technologies Private LimitedvsCTR Manufacturing Industries Limited

The applicant challenged the District Judge's order which prevented them from filing a counterclaim seeking revocation of a patent. The dispute involved an infringement suit filed by respondents against the applicant. The High Court allowed the Civil Revision Application, holding that the trial judge erred in interpreting Section 104 of the Patents Act.

patentC.A. (COMM.IPD-PAT) 484/2022

Rms Fire And Safety Services Pvt LtdvsIspl Automation Pvt Ltd

The appellant challenged the revocation of their patent for a Motor Bike Fire Engine granted in 2019. The case was heard by the Delhi High Court to determine its territorial jurisdiction over an appeal originating from the Mumbai Patent Office. Ultimately, the court held that since the appropriate office was in Mumbai, it lacked jurisdiction.

patentCM(M) 71/2021

Sagar Ratna Restaurants Pvt LtdvsD S Foods & Ors.

Sagar Ratna Restaurants Pvt Ltd challenged an order that referred its trademark dispute against D S Foods & Ors. to arbitration. The petitioner asserted ownership of the trademarks "SAGAR," "RATNA," and "SAGAR RATNA" and alleged infringement by the respondents, who were franchisees. Despite arguments for arbitrability based on the franchise agreement, the Delhi High Court ultimately intervened, finding that the core dispute concerning trademark rights was not amenable to arbitration due to inherent jurisdictional limitations.

patentCS(COMM) 5/2020 I.A.129/2020

M/S Asugar Engineering Services & Anr.vsWeld Trade Pvt. Ltd. and M's Sharp Technoengineers Pvt. Ltd.

The Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiffs to implead M's Sharp Technoengineers Pvt. Ltd. as a defendant in the trademark infringement suit, recognizing that this new party was also infringing the 'AZUCAR' mark. The court found it necessary for the cause of action against them. Furthermore, the court extended existing interim orders to include the newly added defendant. This procedural step ensures all parties involved in the alleged trademark violation are properly before the court.

patentCS(COMM) 155/2020

Astrazenca Ab & AnrvsWest Coast Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd.

The Delhi High Court heard the matter concerning suit patents held by Astrazenca Ab & Anr against West Coast Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd. The court addressed the validity dates of the two patents (IN '147 and IN '625) and accepted an undertaking from the defendant that they do not manufacture or sell infringing products related to Dapagliflozin.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Dealing with a patent challenge?

Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.

Talk to our patent team →

Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call