Gujarat: 3 companies restrained from launching diabetes medicine

Picture used for representational purpose onlyPicture used for representational purpose only
AHMEDABAD: A commercial court here has temporarily restrained three Gujarat-based pharmaceutical companies – Cadila Healthcare Ltd, Maan Pharmaceutical Ltd and West Coast Pharmaceutical Works Ltd – from manufacturing and launching in the market a medicine for Type-2 diabetes.

The interim ex-parte injunction was granted on any plan by the companies to launch, make or sell a drug called Linagliptin till April

25. This happened on a suit filed by German pharma giant Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co KG, which has claimed a patent on Linagliptin Metformin Hydrochloride tablets. The local companies have been asked to not make even a generic version of the drug or any other product covered by the German company’s patent, which was obtained from the Controller of Patents in January 2009 and October 2010.

The German company claimed that it learned from news reports about Cadila obtaining a tentative licence to export the drug and getting permission from USFDA, after the Indian company informed the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) in October 2018. It immediately filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act to find out if the controller of drugs had issued a license to the three companies to launch the medicine.

The company claimed that it holds the patent for Linagliptin, which is valid for the next three years.

The judge of the commercial court, Moolchand Tyagi, said that Boehringer Ingelheim has duly registered Linagliptin tablet and FDC of Linagliptin + Metformin Hydrochloride tablets. The facts obtained under the RTI laws from the controller of drugs reveal that the companies were about to launch the medicine, thus infringing on the patents of the German company.

The judge further said, “In my considered view, the plaintiff has a prima facie case in its favour and balance of convenience also lies in its favour. If the plaintiff is not granted ex-parte ad interim injunction, it would cause irreparable loss to the plaintiff and further it will cause prejudice to the rights of the plaintiff. Further delay in granting protection would cause hardship and defeat the object of the suit.”

The court issued notices to all three companies and sought their replies by April 25.