Chennai, Feb 23 (UNI) Indian Patents Act Section 3 (d) was a legislative policy on patenting and was not violative of TRIPS, submitted Senior Counsel Anand Grover before Madras High Court today.
Making a submission on behalf of the Cancer Patients Aid Association, Mr Grover said the agreement on TRIPS said member countries could have their own system of patenting, independent of TRIPS or their own policies.
Innovative companies were attempting to block entry of generic products but courts had taken strong note of it. There was judicial determination not to allow it, he added.
He said if the litigation filed by Novratis was allowed, it would delay generic forms. Also, frivolous expensive litigation would not help the public. Section 3 (d) of the Indian Patents Act was a legislative policy on patenting.
India was the destination for anti-retrovial drugs for HIV and TB and it was manufacturing 50 per cent of these drugs in affordable prices for developing countries, he added.
He said the section was a guideline and it was not possible constitutionally and legally to accede to the prayer and declare it as violative of TRIPS.
Following this, a Division Bench comprising Justice R Balasubramanian and Justice Prabha Sridevan adjourned further hearing to March five.
Novartis has filed two writ petitions, one seeking to quash the Controller's order rejecting its application for patent and another challenging Section 3 (d) of the Indian Patents Act.
UNI
Making a submission on behalf of the Cancer Patients Aid Association, Mr Grover said the agreement on TRIPS said member countries could have their own system of patenting, independent of TRIPS or their own policies.
Innovative companies were attempting to block entry of generic products but courts had taken strong note of it. There was judicial determination not to allow it, he added.
He said if the litigation filed by Novratis was allowed, it would delay generic forms. Also, frivolous expensive litigation would not help the public. Section 3 (d) of the Indian Patents Act was a legislative policy on patenting.
India was the destination for anti-retrovial drugs for HIV and TB and it was manufacturing 50 per cent of these drugs in affordable prices for developing countries, he added.
He said the section was a guideline and it was not possible constitutionally and legally to accede to the prayer and declare it as violative of TRIPS.
Following this, a Division Bench comprising Justice R Balasubramanian and Justice Prabha Sridevan adjourned further hearing to March five.
Novartis has filed two writ petitions, one seeking to quash the Controller's order rejecting its application for patent and another challenging Section 3 (d) of the Indian Patents Act.
UNI
Oneindia Login