{"id":210224,"date":"2010-04-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010"},"modified":"2015-08-14T19:54:00","modified_gmt":"2015-08-14T14:24:00","slug":"zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Orissa High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                                      R.N.BISWAL, J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>                  W.P.(C) NO.11213 of 2009 ( Decided on 16. 04. 2010<br \/>\nZYDUS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.                          &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..         Petitioner\n<\/p>\n<p>                                             -V-\n<\/p>\n<p>B. RAJA RAM PATRA                                  &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;           Opp.Party<br \/>\nCIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 (ACT NO.5 OF 1908) &#8211; SEC.21 r\/w<br \/>\nORDER 14, RULE 2(2)(a).\n<\/p>\n<p>      For Petitioner &#8211; M\/s. Subash Chandra Lal, S.Lal, &amp; Sujata La.\n<\/p>\n<p>      For Opp.Party &#8211; M\/s. K.K.Jena, A.K.Mohapatra &amp; S.N.Das.\n<\/p>\n<p>R.N.BISWAL, J. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.04.2009 passed by<br \/>\nthe learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court, Cuttack in C.S. No.127 of 2006,<br \/>\nwherein he rejected the petition filed under Order-14, Rule-2 (2) (a) read with Section 21<br \/>\nof C.P.C., by the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. Opp. party as plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit against the defendant claiming<br \/>\nRs.70,86,338.54\/- with interest. As per his case, he was dealing in electronic goods at<br \/>\nVisakhapatnam. Cadila Health Care Ltd., a private company which was manufacturing<br \/>\nand marketing pharmaceuticals, cosmetic and other products, appointed the plaintiff as<br \/>\ntheir Clearing and Forwarding Agent for the state of Orissa by opening their office at<br \/>\nCuttack. An agreement was executed between the parties to that effect on 01.02.1999.<br \/>\nAccordingly, the plaintiff started its establishment at Cuttack by taking a go-down-cum-<br \/>\noffice on rent and appointing two employees. Subsequently, the aforesaid company<br \/>\nbifurcated its business by forming another sister concern company in the name and style<br \/>\nof Zydus Pharmaceuticals Limited. Cadila HealthCare Ltd., dealt in manufacturing of the<br \/>\naforesaid products while Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (defendant) marketed the same.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.       Plaintiff invested a huge amount of money to fulfill the requirements of the<br \/>\ndefendant-company. He shifted his business from Visakhapatnam to Cuttack, took a<br \/>\ngo-down-cum-office on rent, furnished the office with Computer, Printer, Air conditioner,<br \/>\nFax, Telephone line etc. to carry out the business as Clearing and Forwarding Agent. He<br \/>\ninvested more than a sum of Rs. 1,50,685.00\/-. Besides the said investment, as per the<br \/>\nrequirement of the Cadila Health Care Limited, the plaintiff dispatched a demand draft of<br \/>\nRs.7,50,000.00\/- in its favour towards security deposit which was subsequently refunded<br \/>\nalong with interest with direction to deposit a sum of Rs.7,86,813.00\/- with Zydus<br \/>\nPharmaceuticals Limited. Accordingly, he deposited the said amount on 30.03.2001, but<br \/>\nunfortunately, without any valid reason, and without canceling the agency of the plaintiff,<br \/>\nthe defendant company stopped supply of its product to the plaintiff with effect from<br \/>\n18.12.2002 and directed him to handover the entire stock available with him to one M\/s.<br \/>\nEssar Associates of Jaunliapati, Cuttack, a newly appointed Clearing and Forwarding<br \/>\nAgent of the defendant. So, the plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit with prayer as mentioned<br \/>\nearlier. On being noticed defendant appeared in the suit and filed written statement. It<br \/>\nalso filed a petition under Order-14, Rule-2 (2) (a) read with Section 21 of C.P.C., to hear<br \/>\non the point of jurisdiction as preliminary issue and pass necessary orders thereon.\n<\/p>\n<p>   As per the petition, in paragraph-4 of the plaint it is averred that:-<br \/>\n    &#8220;4. That as the business of the Plaintiff comes under the business of Zydus<br \/>\n   Pharmaceuticals Limited, without executing any agreement with the Plaintiff, Zydus<br \/>\n   Pharmaceuticals Limited continued its business with the Plaintiff on the footing of the<br \/>\n   agreement continuing with Cadila Healthcare Limited without renewing the<br \/>\n   agreement which was valid for one year only.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Such statement of the plaintiff clearly and unambiguously proved that although there<br \/>\nwas no agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant-company, yet the plaintiff<br \/>\ncontinued the business with the defendant-company on the footing of the agreement<br \/>\nwith Cadila Healthcare Limited without renewing the same. In clause 8.2 of the<br \/>\nagreement dated 1.2.1999, it has been provided as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>       &#8220;8.2-This agreement is concluded at Ahamadabad and courts at Ahamadabad<br \/>\nalone shall have jurisdiction to try any dispute\/difference arising or connected with this<br \/>\nagreement&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>As per this clause, the plaintiff ought to have filed the suit at Ahamadabad only and<br \/>\nnowhere else.\n<\/p>\n<p>4. After hearing the said petition, the trial court rejected it on the ground that<br \/>\njurisdiction of the court being a mixed question of law and fact, it can not be decided as<br \/>\npreliminary issue. Being aggrieved with the said order, defendant (hereinafter called the<br \/>\npetitioner) has filed the present writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that as found from<br \/>\nparagraphs-4 of the plaint, opp. party admitted that he continued his business with the<br \/>\npetitioner-company on the basis of the agreement dated 1.2.1999 executed between him<br \/>\nand Cadila Healthcare Limited. As per the agreement, any dispute between the parties<br \/>\nwas to be decided by a competent court at Ahamadabad. Since the petitioner-company<br \/>\nis a sister concern of the Cadila Healthcare Limited and the opposite party continued his<br \/>\nbusiness with the petitioner-company on the basis of agreement entered into between<br \/>\nCadila Health Care Limited and himself, the trial court should have allowed the petition<br \/>\nunder Order-14, Rule-2 (2) (a) read with Section 21 of C.P.C. It committed a gross error<br \/>\nof law leading to miscarriage of justice in holding that the point of jurisdiction was a<br \/>\nmixed question of law and fact.\n<\/p>\n<p>6. On the contrary, learned counsel for the opposite party contended that since the<br \/>\nagreement between the opposite party and Cadila Health Care Limited was valid for one<br \/>\nyear only, the agreement lost its force on 31.1.2000, and, as such, the opposite party is<br \/>\nnot bound by that agreement. So, the trial court rightly rejected the petition. He further<br \/>\nsubmitted that opp. party was representing the petitioner-company before Sales Tax<br \/>\nAuthorities for sales tax assessment at Cuttack. The petitioner-company is carrying on<br \/>\nits business at Cuttack. So, the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court Cuttack<br \/>\nhas jurisdiction to hear the suit. Opp. party would face much hardship and financial loss<br \/>\nif he would be asked to file the suit at Ahamadabad. Because of this, the writ petition<br \/>\ndeserved to be quashed. In support of his submission, he relied on the decision, <a href=\"\/doc\/884628\/\">Orissa<br \/>\nStavedores (P) v. Hindustan Fertilizer Corporation Ltd. and others<\/a>, 1986 (I) OLR-<br \/>\n337, where this Court held that:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>           &#8220;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;even though the agreement between the parties choosing a<br \/>\n    particular Court out of the several Courts having jurisdiction operates as estoppel<br \/>\n    between the parties, it does not really oust the jurisdiction of the Court and cannot<br \/>\n    be construed to deprive a Court to exercise the jurisdiction which the law of the land<br \/>\n    has conferred upon it. Ordinarily the Court whose jurisdiction has been ousted by<br \/>\n    agreement between the parties would have due regard to the stipulation in the<br \/>\n    agreement. It can still exercise jurisdiction if it is satisfied that the said stipulation is<br \/>\n    oppressive, harsh, inequitable or unfair or that for the ends of justice, the Court in its<br \/>\n    discretion thinks it appropriate to exercise jurisdiction.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In the decision of <a href=\"\/doc\/541238\/\">Shri Janaki Ballav Patnaik v. Bennet Coleman and Co., Ltd., and<br \/>\nothers<\/a> 1988 (II) OLR 143, this court held that if an issue relating to jurisdiction of a Court<br \/>\nis an issue of law only, which can be decided on the admitted pleadings of the parties de<br \/>\nhors fact, the issue can be decided as a preliminary issue. In the present case, in his<br \/>\npleading, opposite party averred that it continued to work as Clearing and Forwarding<br \/>\nAgent under Zydus Pharmaceuticals Limited on the basis of agreement dated 1.2.1999<br \/>\nentered into between himself and Cadila Healthcare Limited. Admittedly, the said<br \/>\nagreement was valid for one year only. Whether the clause containing jurisdiction of<br \/>\ncourt would amount to admission or not is to be decided. Evidence is not required to be<br \/>\nled in this regard. The issue of jurisdiction is to be decided on point of law only. The<br \/>\nfinding of the trial court that the point of jurisdiction involves facts and law is not correct.<br \/>\nHowever, the opp. party may raise the point that the stipulation in the agreement is<br \/>\noppressive, harsh, inequitable or unfair by citing the decision, Orissa Stavedores (supra)<br \/>\nbefore the trial court.\n<\/p>\n<p>7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 27.04.2009<br \/>\npassed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court, Cuttack in C.S. No.127 of<br \/>\n2006 is set aside and the trial court is directed to hear on the point of jurisdiction as<br \/>\npreliminary issue. No cost.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                                  Writ petition allowed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Orissa High Court Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010 R.N.BISWAL, J. W.P.(C) NO.11213 of 2009 ( Decided on 16. 04. 2010 ZYDUS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. Petitioner -V- B. RAJA RAM PATRA &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; Opp.Party CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 (ACT NO.5 OF 1908) &#8211; SEC.21 r\/w ORDER 14, RULE 2(2)(a). For Petitioner &#8211; M\/s. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,25],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-210224","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-orissa-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-04-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-14T14:24:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-14T14:24:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1368,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Orissa High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-14T14:24:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-14T14:24:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-14T14:24:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010"},"wordCount":1368,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Orissa High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010","name":"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-14T14:24:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/zydus-pharmaceuticals-ltd-vs-v-on-16-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Zydus Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs V on 16 April, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/210224","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=210224"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/210224\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=210224"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=210224"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=210224"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}