Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
21 judgments · newest first · showing 1–21
The petitioner, Ashtang Medicals, had its licence for distributing medicines under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 suspended by the Assistant Commissioner on 1 September 2026. The petitioner filed an appeal and a stay application before the State Minister under Rule 66(2) of the Drugs and …
The petitioner, Ashish Life Science Pvt. Ltd., challenged an order dated 28 September 2026 issued by the Minister, Food and Drugs Administration, Maharashtra State, which cancelled its licences effective 1 October 2026. The order, passed under Rule 85(3) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, was …
The petitioner, Ashish Life Science Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking the quashing of a cancellation order dated 1 July 2026 issued by the Joint Commissioner (Konkan Division) under the Food & Drug Administration, and also sought revocation of a show‑cause notice …
The petitioners, operators of duty‑free shops at Mumbai International Airport, were selling nicotine‑pouch products (brand “ZYN” and “FOX”) without a Drugs and Cosmetics Act import licence or registration certificate. The Union of India and various drug‑control and customs officials issued notices …
The petitioners, operators of duty‑free shops at Mumbai International Airport, were selling nicotine‑pouch products (brand “ZYN” and “FOX”) without a Drugs and Cosmetics Act import licence or registration certificate. The Union of India and various drug‑control and customs officials issued notices …
M/s ASK Pharma filed a writ petition challenging an order of the State Drug Controller and related authorities. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition and to appeal the order. The Patna High Court allowed the withdrawal and directed the petitioner to file an appeal under Rule …
M/s Sukhi Enterprises, represented by Vijay Kumar, filed a writ petition challenging an order of the State Drug Controller-cum-Chief Licensing Authority. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ application and instead file an appeal under Rule 66(2) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, …
The petitioner, M/s Ravi Pharma, sought permission to withdraw its writ petition and to file an appeal against an order of the licensing authority. The court allowed the withdrawal and directed the petitioner to file an appeal under Rule 66(2) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. A stay of the …
The State of Andhra Pradesh alleged that INOX Air Products Ltd. (now INOX Air Products Private Ltd.) sold Nitrous Oxide I.P. to a third‑party firm that allegedly lacked a Form 20B licence, thereby violating s.18(a)(vi) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and attracting punishment under s.27(d). The …
Dr. S. Athilakshmi, a registered medical practitioner and associate professor of dermatology, was inspected by a Drugs Inspector who seized a small quantity of lotions and ointments from her private practice premises. The Inspector alleged that she had "stocked" and sold the drugs without a valid …
The appellants, owners of a chemical trading company, were accused of contravening the Drugs and Cosmetics Act by purchasing and allegedly repackaging pyridoxal‑5‑phosphate, a bulk food substance, for sale to drug manufacturers. The complaint was filed more than four years after the initial …
Genentech Inc., Roche Products (India) and F. Hoffmann‑La Roche filed a suit in the Delhi High Court seeking to restrain Reliance Life Sciences from launching its biosimilar product ‘TrastuRel’, alleging improper use of data and passing off. The Single Judge of the High Court, on 25 April 2016, …
The Supreme Court examined the validity of a 27 April 2018 notification issued under Section 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act that restricted the domestic manufacture of oxytocin to public‑sector undertakings, excluding private manufacturers, while allowing export by both sectors. The petitioners …
The Supreme Court examined whether the Central Government must obtain prior advice from the Drugs Technical Advisory Board (DTAB) before invoking the power under Section 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 to prohibit, restrict or regulate a drug or cosmetic in public interest. The Court held …
The Supreme Court examined whether a drug‑manufacturing loan licencee, Cosme Pharma Laboratories Ltd, which contracts job workers to produce its medicaments, should be treated as a "manufacturer" under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and thus liable for excise duty. The Commissioner of Central Excise …
The Delhi High Court, in a public‑interest writ, ordered manufacturers of drugs and cosmetics (other than life‑saving drugs) to display symbols indicating whether the product contained vegetarian or non‑vegetarian ingredients. The petitioners challenged this order, arguing that the Drugs and …
The Supreme Court examined whether "physician samples" of patented and proprietary medicines, which are distributed free of cost to doctors and prohibited from sale under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, are liable to central excise duty. It held that excise duty is a tax on manufacture, not on sale, …
The appellant, Mis. Ponds India Ltd., produced Vaseline white petroleum jelly under a licence granted by the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. For assessment years 1981‑1989 the Trade Tax Tribunal classified the product as a pharmaceutical preparation (a "drug") under Entry 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Trade …
The appellants, diploma holders in Community Medical Service, were authorized by a 1980 notification to treat common diseases in rural West Bengal. The State later barred them from issuing prescriptions and medical certificates, requiring counter‑signatures. The diploma holders challenged this …
The Supreme Court examined whether Rule 2(ee)(iii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, which defines "registered medical practitioner", exceeded the legislative competence of the Central Government under the Indian Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and whether state notifications declaring …
The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ under Article 32 filed by Common Cause seeking remedial measures for the serious deficiencies in India’s blood‑banking system. A 1990 consultancy report highlighted widespread unlicensed banks, reliance on professional donors, inadequate testing, …
