Supreme Court of India
M/s Philips Medical Systems (cleveland) Inc. v. M/s Indian Mri Diagnostic & Research Ltd. & Anr.
INSC stands for INDIAN SUPREME COURT. A neutral citation scheme assigned by the Court itself, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter. INSC is the neutral citation scheme assigned by the Supreme Court, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter.
2 Supreme Court benches have cited this judgment.
What the Court ordered
In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the impugned judgment and order dated 29.11.2005 passed by the MRTP Commission cannot be sustained and it is hereby set aside.
Judgment, page 18
From the headnote
Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 - c s. 36 (as amended in 1991) - Definition of unfair trade prac- fices - Interpretation of - Situation where seller not selling good at all to purchaser - Application of s. 36A - Held: Per Kalju J: s. 36A does not apply in a situation where goods are not sold at all - It only applies where goods in fact are sold - By 1991 amendment, definition of unfair trade practice was made inclusive and not exhaustive - However, while interpret- ~ ing amended s. 36A, the object of s. 36A should not be disre- garded - Per Kabir J: s. 36A cannot in
Authorities it was built on
Where later benches applied it
- 2022 B.B. Patel & Ors v. Dlf Universal Ltd
- 2010 Ramala Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd., U.P. v. Commissioner, Central Excise, Meerut-1
Of those, 2 relied on
Sign in free to read it
- The full judgment, page by page, as published in the Supreme Court Reports
- The ratio: what the Court held, verbatim, with the page it sits on
- Every bench that relied on it, and every bench that argued against it
- Search every reported judgment, by party, citation or question
- Download the PDF, copy pinpoint citations ready for a filing
An email address, no password.