AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 142 wordsC.A. No. 4005/2004
We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We are not inclined to decide the question whether Diosmin was rightly included in Schedule I of the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1995 in view of the decision rendered by this Court in Secretary, Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers, Government of India v. Cipla Ltd. and Others [(2003) 7 SCC 1]. To this extent, we remand the matter back to the High Court for reconsideration in view of the said decision.
Judgment reserved on the other issues.
CA. No. 329 of 2005, CA. No. 4005 of 2004, SLPs (C) Nos. 15583-84 of 2005, SLP (C) No. 15831, 22788 of 2013 and SLP (C) No. 22788 of 2013, SLPs (C) Nos. 19174-97 of 2014.
Application for intervention is dismissed.
Leave granted in SLPs.
Arguments concluded.
Judgment reserved.