- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
A summary of the important cases from the causelists of the Delhi High Court.
LIST OF CASES
SUMMARY OF CASES
1. Ashutosh v Arun Jaitley & Ors.
[Item 5, Court 3- FAO(OS) 174/2016]
Bench- Pradeep Nandrajog, Mukta Gupta JJ.
An appeal filed by AAP leader Ashutosh opposing fresh allegations made by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley in the defamation case that the latter had filed against Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal and other AAP leaders. Ashutosh is also a party to the case.
The AAP leader has challenged a Single Bench’s order of April 29 by which Jaitley’s rejoinder to the replies of Kejriwal, Ashutosh and four others, who are party in the defamation suit, was allowed and in which the BJP leader has allegedly made a fresh allegation.
Today in Court- The Bench dismissed the appeal. However, the Bench added that it needed to giver certain clarifications to some of the findings of the impugned order, as it “prima facie appeared to be contrary to the law”. So a detailed order is expected to be passed tomorrow.
2. F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd & Ors v Drugs Controller General of India & Ors.
[Item 1, Court 22- CS(COMM) 540/2016]
Bench- Valmiki Mehta J.
Petition filed by Hoffmann-La Roche claiming that the Central Government had not followed due process before granting approval for biosimilars of its drug.
On the last date of hearing, Justice Valmiki Mehta had directed the company to file its reply and also compile a list of cases which would highlight protection given to innovators of drugs.
The Bench had also directed Roche to prove that it had a personal interest and was bound to be affected by the approvals granted by the Centre to biosimilars of its drug, Avastin (bevacizumab), which is used to treat cancer.
Today in Court- This case could not be tracked. Any leads/inputs would be appreciated.
3. Sushil Kumar v. Union of India
[Item 23, Court 10- W.P.(C) 4514/2016]
Bench: Manmohan J.
Petition filed by professional wrestler Sushil Kumar seeking conduct of trials for selection to the 74-kg men’s freestyle event for the Rio Olympics. Olympic medallist Kumar and fellow wrestler Narsingh Yadav are engaged in a selection battle for a spot in the wrestling squad going to the Olympics this year.
Today in Court-
Justice Manmohan has been hearing Kumar’s petition on a regular basis for two days and yesterday, the Bench had come down hard on Kumar for questioning the selection policy (to Olympics) of the Wrestling Federation of India [WFI].
“You can’t run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. The same policy has allowed you to participate in the 2004, 2008 and 2012 Olympics. It has been consistent so far and now you are challenging it”, said Manmohan J.
The Court had also expressed its reservations over the entire episode when Justice Manmohan had observed that ‘there was some politics at the Federation that was being played out in Court’.
Senior Advocate Amit Sibal who appeared for Kumar, had then pressed for the implementation of the National Sports Code that prescribes selection trials for international events like the Olympics. He further submitted that similar trials were held in various other countries and the WFI had not even invited Kumar to undergo any such trial before announcing their selections.
The Bench then reserved orders. The order is expected to be pronounced on Monday, June 6.
4. Pfizer Ltd & Anr Vs Union of India & Anr and Laborate Pharmaceuticals India Ltd Vs Drugs Controller General of India & Anr. [Batch matters]
[Items 6-455, Court 12]
Bench: RS Endlaw J.
The petitions challenging the Govt’s notification banning FDC drugs. (Read to know more about the lawyers and law firms involved in this litigation)