GLAXO SMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICAL LTD. THROUGH ITS SENIOR GENERAL MANAGER LEGAL AND SECRETARIAL vs UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY — C.A. No. 6178/2009

Case under Section III. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010062952004

Filing Date

19-Mar-2004

Registration No

C.A. No. 6178/2009

Diary Number

6295/2004

Order Date

18-Jul-2017

Document Type

Judgement - of Main Case

Neutral Citation

2017 INSC 635

Disposal Type

Allowed

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Section III

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GLAXO SMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICAL LTD. THROUGH ITS SENIOR GENERAL MANAGER LEGAL AND SECRETARIAL

    Adv. GAGRAT AND CO

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY

    Adv. B. KRISHNA PRASAD

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Jul-2017

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 18-Jul-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 18-Jul-2017

    Not Taken Up

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul

  5. 13-Jul-2017

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 24-Jul-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 06-Jul-2006

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 13-Feb-2006

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 12-Apr-2004

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 19-Mar-2004

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 6178/2009

  11. [ 2017 INSC 635 ]

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Union of India Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court judgment, holding that Glaxo Smithkline can charge non-DPCO-controlled prices for drugs manufactured during the exemption period (until 31 December 1994), even if sold after that date. Key Reasoning: The court interpreted Paragraph 28 of the Drugs (Prices Control) Order 1987 to mean that price control exemptions relate to manufacture, not sale. Since the exemption applied to goods manufactured by 31 December 1994, the company could thereafter charge unilaterally-determined prices uncontrolled by government price fixation, rejecting the government's demand for Rs. 2.04 crores in allegedly overcharged amounts from post-exemption sales. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case