Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: andhra pradesh Page 11 of about 2,101 results (0.053 seconds)

Sep 06 1972 (HC)

K.Y. Sodamma and anr. Vs. K. Gunneswarudu

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1973AP295

..... their lordships observed that they were not impressed by this argument, as ' in the first place decrees are passed in appeals heard under the letters patent only under the code of civil procedure. in the second place, section 114(b) does not require that orders and decrees should have been passed ..... mad 670 ) a question arose whether it is competent to the high court to review judgments in appeal preferred under clause 15 of the letters patent. one of the arguments advanced was that section 114 of the civil procedure code dealing with review cannot apply as it provides only for the review of ..... air1965all79 , where it was held that having regard to sections 117 and 122, civil procedure code. order 44 will apply to special appeal ( equivalent to a letters patent appeal ) against a judgment of the high court in a first appeal, unless there is anything in the rules contained in the schedule to the code ..... subordinate courts. hence it was necessary to provide specifically that the provisions of that order will apply to appeals under clause 15 of the letters patent which are against the judgments of the high court and not of subordinate courts. order 44 however, is of a general nature and applies ..... unable to agree with this contention. the expression ' appeal ' used in this order is comprehensive enough and includes all appeals, including a letters patent appeal. the code of civil procedure is an act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to the procedure of the courts of civil judicature. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 1962 (HC)

In Re: Patthi Srinadham and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1963AP18

..... the present case.10. i, therefore, hold on point no. i that a review lies in law against the order refusing leave to file a letters patent appeal.11. point no. 2. the learned counsel for the petitioners-plaintiffs contends that there are sufficient grounds for reviewing the order 'no leave' of ..... council dealt with the contention that the orders and rules made under the code of civil procedure, 1908 have no application to appeals brought under the letters patent of 1865. their lordships observed that the said contention was too wide and concluded thus (at p. 318 (of mad lj) : (at p. 84 ..... . 671 of air) ). 'apparently the practice of this high court has been in favour of allowing reviews to be filed in appeals under the letters patent.' the learned judges followed the decision of the bombay high court in ratanchand khimchand v. damji dharsey, air 1927 bom 232 and held that section 114 applied ..... as at present advised, we are in agreement with mr. subrahmanya ayyar that this provision would not enable courts, by implication, to supplement the letters patent by importing into it all acts ejusdem generis passed by the governor-general in council..... even in this view, we think that by section 117 of ..... judgment, the learned judge stated in the end 'no leave' which obviously means that he refused leave to the appellants-plaintiffs to file a letters patent appeal against that decision. the two appellants filed s.r. no. 5072 of 1961 praying for review of that order of srinivasachari, j. so far .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 1974 (HC)

P. Bathinaiah Vs. P. Visweswara Pillai and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1975AP11

..... it is a fit case for appeal.9. in the absence of such declaration, it unambiguously emerges from the language of clause 15 of the letters patent that no letters patent appeal against the order of chinnappa reddi, j. in c. m.a. no. 562 of 1972 is maintainable. the reference is answered accordingly. however ..... first part of clause 15. ramesam. j. observed at page 225 = (at p. 572 of air) that 'civil procedure code does not control the section of the letters patent.' the same view was expressed by ananta krishna aiyar, j. also at page 235 = (at p. 576 of air). but this does not help the contention of ..... the high court, unless the judge who has passed the judgment declares that the case is a fit one for appeal. the reason for this is patent. when a single judge of this court sits in appeal over a judgment or order passed by the appellate court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction ..... remitted the appeal back to that court for its disposal on merits. the plaintiff seeks to impugn this order of chinnappa reddy, j., by filing this letters patent appeal.3. the office took an objection that the c.m.a. disposed of by chinnappa reddy, j. is in the nature of a second appeal ..... brought by the appellants to the trial court for disposal on merits.2. what happened in this case is; the plaintiff. who seeks to bring this letters patent appeal, filed o. s. no. 149 of 1966 in the district munsifs court, srikalahasthi for permanent injunction in respect of certain properties. that claim was founded .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 07 1983 (HC)

Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Addl. Labour Court ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : (1984)ILLJ128AP

..... to discharge his normal duties and that constituted reasonable cause for not imposing the penalty or removal on him. the labour court, in the circumstance of the case, committed a patent error in holding that the penalty of removal was shockingly disproportionate or that it was illegal, as the 2nd respondent failed to perform the primary and basic duty cast on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 2002 (HC)

Thotakura Ravindra Babu and anr. Vs. Thotakura Seshagiri Rao

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(2)ALD521

..... the said decision was later considered by the supreme court in the decision (supra) and it was categorically held that no further appeal under letters patent lie from the matter arising out of order 43, rule 1 cpc. therefore, when the earlier decision of the supreme court (supra) is clarified ..... provides that no further appeal lies, the present lpas are not maintainable. in support of his contention that the provisions of clause 15 of letters patent is subject to other legislations, as provided under clause 44, learned counsel placed reliance on a decision of the supreme court in national sewing thread ..... when there is a specific embargo under sub-section (2) of section 104 of cpc, the present lpas are not maintainable even though the letters patent is a special enactment. elaborating his submissions, learned counsel submitted that the ratio laid down by the four judge bench of the supreme court in ..... )1scc49 , submitting that the supreme court in these two decisions has not elaborately discussed the implications arising out of order 43 rule 1 has the letters patent clauses and as such, the earlier four judges decision of the supreme court in union of india's case (supra) shall prevail over these two decisions ..... 302, the embargo as provided under sub-section (2) of section 104 of cpc is not an obstacle for filing an appeal, under the letters patent provisions against the orders passed by the learned single judge in the proceedings under order 43, rule 1 or order 47, rule 1 cpc. learned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 1976 (HC)

N.M. Mehta Vs. Coromandal Fertilizers Ltd. and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : (1977)ILLJ151AP

..... expressions 'no employer shall without a reasonable cause ...terminate the service of an employee.,' and the words 'without giving such employee...'. the expression 'such employee' used in the later limb patently refers to the employee whose services have been terminated. therefore, it appears to us that in the first part of the sub-section, the legislature has imposed an embargo on ..... reasons. learned government pleader gave his support to the construction laid by the employee-appellant. if sub-section (1) is read by itself, it may be capable of either construction. patently the wording of the sub-section is not very happy. we hope and trust that the legislature would, at the earliest point of time, amend the sub-section in such .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 26 2008 (HC)

Mekala Thimmaraju and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2008(5)ALD726; 2008(6)ALT791

..... interest, the collector has no option except to order for its disposal. while the reason, namely, the speedy and natural decay of the commodity given by the district collectors is patent, a close analysis of the impugned orders by which they directed distribution of the seized commodities through public distribution system instead of selling the same in the public auction clearly .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 31 1999 (HC)

iqbal Begum Vs. Chote Miyan

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1999(6)ALD217; 1999(6)ALT128

..... nor it has contained the traits and trappings of finality. in order to treat an order as a 'judgment' within the meaning of the letters patent, a controversy must have been decided affecting the valuable rights of the parties. by the order under challenge, the learned single judge has simply set aside ..... a controversy which affects valuable rights of one of the parties, it must be treated to be a judgment within the meaning of the letters patent. every interlocutory order cannot be treated as a judgment but only those orders would be judgment which decide matters of moment or affect vital and ..... now, we may refer to the interpretation given by the supreme court with regard to the word 'judgment' appearing in clause 15 of the letters patent of the high court which has been the subject-matter of judicial interpretation by the supreme court in khimji's case supra. the supreme court in ..... various clauses of order 43, rule i to a larger bench of the high court without at all disturbing, interfering with or overriding the letters patent jurisdiction. this was not the situation in the present case on hand. the learned judge has only set aside the order passed in the crp ..... which, the present appeal is filed. that is how the appellant has sought to invoke the jurisdiction of this court under clause 15 of the letters patent.3. sri lakshmareddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the procedure followed by the learned single judge in treating the application filed under order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 2003 (HC)

State of A.P. Vs. Laksminarayana @ Langoda Laxman

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2003(3)ALD57; 2003(3)ALT439

..... heirs or successors in our or their privy council, as hereinafter provided.'from plain reading of this clause it is clear that there is no letters patent jurisdiction available to the high court over an order of single judge passed while exercising revisional jurisdiction. it is also not available against judgments of learned ..... 1st court and the 1 st court passed the following order:'treat the note submitted by the office as an appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent against that part of the judgment in which the directions are issued to the subordinate courts. admit. issue notice. until further order, there shall be ..... judge in a criminal revision is at all amenable to letters patent jurisdiction of the high court and if such appeal is maintainable whether the registrar (judicial) could have put up a note and the chief justice could ..... note of the registrar (judicial) was treated by the division bench headed by the learned chief justice as an lpa under clause 15 of the letters patent and the order of the learned single judge was partially stayed. we have our own doubts as to whether an order passed by the learned single ..... is not a judge of andhra pradesh high court now, therefore in compulsion, as the judges who passed the earlier order treating the matter as letters patent appeal are not available, we have heard this matter. when this matter came up before us on 8-11-2002 we have passed the following order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2001 (HC)

Hindustan Steel Works Construction Limited, Visakhapatnam Vs. N.V. Cho ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(3)ALD621; 2001(4)ALT558

..... act. meeting a similar situation, the supreme court in the decision cited (supra), clarified the law relating to the maintainability of the letters patent appeal against an order passed by the learned single judge under section 17 of the arbitration act and held that when there is a specific ..... that an order passed by the learned single judge under section 6 of the specific relief act is appealable under clause 15 of the letters patent.9. the present case, however, arises out of an order passed by the learned single judge under sections 14 and 17 of tire arbitration ..... power flowing from the paramount charter under which the high court functions would not get excluded unless the statutory enactment concerned expressly excludes appeals under letters patent. no such bar is discernible from section 6(3) of the act.'8. the supreme court, in the facts of that case, held ..... 1) of the act, the same cannot be appealed against before a division bench. he, therefore, stated on this ground alone, the present letters patent appeal has to be dismissed. in support of his contention, learned senior counsel placed strong reliance on a decision of the supreme court in state of ..... counsel along with sri krishna murthy, counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of this letters patent appeal before the division bench of this court on the ground that no appeal against an order passed by the learned single judge lies to the .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //