Aditi Singh and Meera Emmanuel.The Madras High Court today reserved orders in the plea filed against the Court-ordered ban on the online sale of medicines..While doing so, the Court also suspended the ban until the delivery of its verdict, on a request for the same by the appellant-companies. Meanwhile, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court led by its Chief Justice, Justice Rajendra Menon today extended its interim order banning the online sale of medicines through e-pharmacies till January 8, 2019..When the parties appeared before the Delhi High Court today for further consideration of the plea, the Court deemed it appropriate to defer the hearing to await the outcome of the appeal pending before the Madras High Court. It, however, extended its interim stay on the online sale of medicines through e-pharmacies and listed the matter for further hearing on January 8..On Monday, Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana of the Madras High Court had directed the Central government to notify rules regulating the online sale of medicines, while allowing petitions filed by the Tamil Nadu Chemists and Drugs Association (TNCDA) to ban such sale. In para 38 of the judgment, the Court ordered that online traders are bound not to proceed with their online business in drugs and cosmetics until the notification of the regulatory draft rules..Aggrieved by this order, e-pharmacies and intermediaries preferred an appeal before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court, after obtaining a temporary suspension of the ban on online sales. Following a request made for the same today, this suspension has now been extended by the the Division Bench of Justices M Sathyanarayanan and P Rajamanickam until the delivery of its verdict on the appeals..Orders were reserved after hearing arguments from both sides. Arguments on behalf of the TNCDA were made by senior counsel ARL Sunderesan and G Masilamani. Among others, senior counsel PR Raman, PS Raman, MS Krishnan and Satish Parasaran argued for the appellant-companies..Before the Madras High Court, the appellants reasserted today that the petitions preferred by the TNCDA are not maintainable, given that identical prayers were not allowed in similar petitions filed before the High Court three years earlier. Reference was made to the order passed by the then First Bench on December 20, 2016..In the 2016 order, the Court had disposed of the petitions after recording that the government was due to frame rules to regulate the online sale of medicines. The appellants pointed out that while passing the order, the Court did not accede to the plea made to ban such sale in the meanwhile. This being the case, the appellants have argued that TNCDA cannot re-litigate the matter merely because the rules have been framed. It was pointed out that the framing of rules does not denote a new cause of action..Further, since there is no express legal prohibition on the online sale of medicines, the appellants contend that they should not be restrained from carrying on such sale. While making arguments, the appellants submitted that they did not object to the notification of new rules to regulate the online sale of medicines. Their challenge is focused on the single judge’s direction that all online sale of medicines be banned until the rules are notified and complied with..It was submitted that such online sale only takes place with the involvement of registered and licensed pharmacies and medical prescriptions. Hence, there is no violation of any statutory provision in carrying on such sale..Per contra, it was argued on behalf of TNCDA that the online sale of medicines was something that has not been contemplated in the prevailing Drugs and Cosmetics Acts or its Rules. Such activity lies outside the operation of the prevailing law..Inter alia, it was submitted that the prevailing law mandates that drugs and medicines be supplied only on furnishing the original prescription. When it comes to online sale, such prescriptions are furnished in scanned or Xerox form. The law also mandates that dispensation of medicines can only take place at premises that are licensed and registered. This is not the case with the online sale of medicines, it was argued. Ultimately, it is TNCDA’s case that in the absence of regulations controlling such sale, the online sale of medicines cannot be permitted.
Aditi Singh and Meera Emmanuel.The Madras High Court today reserved orders in the plea filed against the Court-ordered ban on the online sale of medicines..While doing so, the Court also suspended the ban until the delivery of its verdict, on a request for the same by the appellant-companies. Meanwhile, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court led by its Chief Justice, Justice Rajendra Menon today extended its interim order banning the online sale of medicines through e-pharmacies till January 8, 2019..When the parties appeared before the Delhi High Court today for further consideration of the plea, the Court deemed it appropriate to defer the hearing to await the outcome of the appeal pending before the Madras High Court. It, however, extended its interim stay on the online sale of medicines through e-pharmacies and listed the matter for further hearing on January 8..On Monday, Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana of the Madras High Court had directed the Central government to notify rules regulating the online sale of medicines, while allowing petitions filed by the Tamil Nadu Chemists and Drugs Association (TNCDA) to ban such sale. In para 38 of the judgment, the Court ordered that online traders are bound not to proceed with their online business in drugs and cosmetics until the notification of the regulatory draft rules..Aggrieved by this order, e-pharmacies and intermediaries preferred an appeal before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court, after obtaining a temporary suspension of the ban on online sales. Following a request made for the same today, this suspension has now been extended by the the Division Bench of Justices M Sathyanarayanan and P Rajamanickam until the delivery of its verdict on the appeals..Orders were reserved after hearing arguments from both sides. Arguments on behalf of the TNCDA were made by senior counsel ARL Sunderesan and G Masilamani. Among others, senior counsel PR Raman, PS Raman, MS Krishnan and Satish Parasaran argued for the appellant-companies..Before the Madras High Court, the appellants reasserted today that the petitions preferred by the TNCDA are not maintainable, given that identical prayers were not allowed in similar petitions filed before the High Court three years earlier. Reference was made to the order passed by the then First Bench on December 20, 2016..In the 2016 order, the Court had disposed of the petitions after recording that the government was due to frame rules to regulate the online sale of medicines. The appellants pointed out that while passing the order, the Court did not accede to the plea made to ban such sale in the meanwhile. This being the case, the appellants have argued that TNCDA cannot re-litigate the matter merely because the rules have been framed. It was pointed out that the framing of rules does not denote a new cause of action..Further, since there is no express legal prohibition on the online sale of medicines, the appellants contend that they should not be restrained from carrying on such sale. While making arguments, the appellants submitted that they did not object to the notification of new rules to regulate the online sale of medicines. Their challenge is focused on the single judge’s direction that all online sale of medicines be banned until the rules are notified and complied with..It was submitted that such online sale only takes place with the involvement of registered and licensed pharmacies and medical prescriptions. Hence, there is no violation of any statutory provision in carrying on such sale..Per contra, it was argued on behalf of TNCDA that the online sale of medicines was something that has not been contemplated in the prevailing Drugs and Cosmetics Acts or its Rules. Such activity lies outside the operation of the prevailing law..Inter alia, it was submitted that the prevailing law mandates that drugs and medicines be supplied only on furnishing the original prescription. When it comes to online sale, such prescriptions are furnished in scanned or Xerox form. The law also mandates that dispensation of medicines can only take place at premises that are licensed and registered. This is not the case with the online sale of medicines, it was argued. Ultimately, it is TNCDA’s case that in the absence of regulations controlling such sale, the online sale of medicines cannot be permitted.
