Civil Suit Cannot be Filed on Mere Apprehension of Litigation : Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court dismissed Cadila Healthcare’s suit against Roche products, holding that a civil suit cannot be based on mere apprehension of litigation without a concrete or imminent injury.

Cadila had sought declarations and an injunction concerning its biosimilar drug “Vivitra”, fearing Roche might challenge its marketing despite no present interference. 

The court ruled that such reliefs were speculative, barred under Section 41(b) of the Specific Relief Act, and unsustainable under Order VII, Rule 11 of the CPC.

The court emphasised that civil suits must have a present cause of action and no court can prospectively restrain a party from initiating lawful litigation. This suit was declared infructuous.