Mumbai: The cost of treating diabetes is expected to fall with the Delhi High Court after refusing to appeal by AstraZeneca, who has been seeking the detention of the generic version of Blockbuster drugs.
Pharma global firm also requires a number of domestic companies for patent violations that include drugs.
The HC message paves the way for a more affordable version immediately by the domestic company of anti-diabetes blockbuster drugs in the market.
In the assessment on July 20, the division bench from the Delhi High Court rejected AstraZeneca’s appeal, said there was no reason to disturb the previous command last year on two patents.
In November, the court had rejected the AstraZeneca application which was looking for detention orders for marketing of anti-diabetes drugs by generic companies, including Intas, Alkem, Zydus, Eris Lifesciences, USV, Torrent, MSN, Micro Labs and Ajanta.
With almost a dozen companies launch a generic version at competitive prices, the stage is set for the price war between the players to get a piece of market diabetes rs 15,000 crore that grows, experts said.
AstraZeneca holds two patents for dapagliflozin in this country – the first (in 147) ended in October last year, while the second (in 625) will end in May 2023.
Simply put, the second patent was not found to have inventive services for what was already in art Previously (previous patent), legal experts told TII.
Dapagliflozin AstraZeneca is sold under the Forxiga brand, and is part of the drug class called SGLT2 inhibitor, worth around RS 5,000 Crore.
S Majumdar, representing the side of the generic company, said, “This decision of landmarks in patent law, acknowledged the need to avoid multiple patents.
In this case, he had a direct impact on diabetic patients since, after the expiration of Astra’s first patent for Dapagliflozin, various generic companies It can also provide drugs at competitive prices.
“Bench said,” We, at least at this stage, incapable, in the face of the application mentioned above from the applicants / Plaintiffs itself, found a difference between 147 and at 625.
” Orders, accessed by Toi, said, “In our opinion, in connection with one discovery, there is only one patent.
However, the applicants / plaintiffs here while claiming one discovery, namely, Dapa, claimed two patents with respect, with a violation of both , by respondents / defendants.
The same, in our view, attacking the roots of the applicant / Plaintiff’s claim and disrupting the applicant / Plaintiff of any temporary assistance.
“Wearing a fine on Astrazeneca, the order said,” Therefore there is no service in the appeal, What was dismissed, with the costs assessed at RS 5 Lakh for respondents / defendants in each setting.
” Overall alright will be Rs 45 Lakh.
SIR, the bench, “to hold, that an inventor, only based on work, research, discovery and art before, but who have not produced products that are able to exploit commercial, but also do not produce commercial exploitation, has the right, by obtaining patents, to hold people, to hold people Others from researching in the same field, will be in our view is not conducive to research and development and will also violate the fundamental tasks of these citizens, enshrined in Article 51A of the Indian Constitution, to develop the scientific temperament and the spirit of investigation.
The same thing will allow the body Busy for, by walking only a portion of a mile, preventing others from finishing miles.
“” We also from Prima Facie View that the Petitioner / Plaintiff, before the USPTO was applied and approved the validity period of the US patent which ended in the same day with the period of US validity equivalent to 147, the applicant / plaintiff, in the country This has no right to claim the second validity period of patents, “he added.