Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: andhra pradesh Year: 1965 Page 1 of about 12 results (0.196 seconds)

Apr 16 1965 (HC)

In Re: S. Seshagirirao

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-16-1965

Reported in : AIR1966AP137; 1966CriLJ512

..... cases which shall be brought before high court in its ordinary original criminal jurisdiction. (b) all other criminal cases over which high court had jurisdiction before publication of the letters patent. (c) all other criminal cases.for cases in categories (a) and (b), it provided that they should be regulated by the procedure and practice which was in use before ..... the supreme court at madras by charter of 1800 and having been recognised, preserved, maintained and referred to in various subsequent enactments and charters namely, charter act of 1861, letters patent, government of india act, 1915, government of india act, 1935 and article 225 of the constitution.30. in surendra singh v. state of uttar pradesh, : 1954crilj475 their lordships had ..... 129 civil procedure code runs as follows:'notwithstanding anything in this code, any high court not being the court of a judicial commissioner may make such rules not inconsistent with the letters patent or order, or other law establishing it to regulate its own procedure in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction as it shall think fit, and nothing herein contained ..... confer such powers? the contention of sarma is that the state high courts did not have any power apart from section 554 criminal procedure code and clause 38 of the amended letters patent us applied to andhra pradesh high court (and corresponding clauses in charters relating to other high courts) and that, therefore, the state high courts have no power and competence .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 1965 (HC)

Balde Pentaiah Vs. Balaganti Mallaiah

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-29-1965

Reported in : AIR1968AP228

..... ) and (2). that being the case, theargument that since no leave is obtained,no appeal will lie is wholly untenable. besides when the letters patent have fixed theforum in relation to the orders passed bya single judge that forum must be the appellate court authorised by law for purposesof section 39(1 ..... that the appeals contemplated by section 39 are appeals to superior courts and not 'inter-court appeals' and therefore the right to appeal under the letters patent was not restricted by sub-sections (1) and (2). their lordships observed that the qualifying expression 'to the court authorised by law to hear appeals ..... appellate jurisdiction. that apart section 39(1) is concerned simply with the authority given by law to hear appeals from original decrees. if the letters patent rules which have force of law give such authority, as they undeniably do, that is sufficient for the purpose. the rulings relied on by the ..... jurisdiction and if at all it nevertheless exercises off and on such a jurisdiction, it is only by reason of clause 13 of the letters patent rules the divisional bench of this court cannot be deemed to be the proper forum contemplated by section 39(1) of the arbitration act. we ..... course of the second appeal. if the arbitration act, was not thus attracted of course the qualification for right in appeal imposed by the letters patent must needs have been satisfied but that is not the case here. the right of appeal conferred by section 39 of the arbitration act cannot therefore .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 1965 (HC)

Muppala Venkata Subbayya Vs. Desiraju Venkata Krishna Sarma

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-02-1965

Reported in : AIR1967AP44

satyanarayana raju, c.j.(1) this appeal, under cl. 15 of the letters patent, arises out of a suit filed by the appellant for recovery of a sum of rs. 5,666-6-6 on the foot of a promissory note, dated the 30th .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1965 (HC)

Soorneedi Sathiraju and ors. Vs. Batchu Venkata Rao,

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-31-1965

Reported in : AIR1966AP154

kumarayya, j. 1. this letters patent appeal arises out of i.a. no. 1610 of 1951 on the the of the subordinate judge's court, kakinada and raises a short point involving the interpretation of section .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 1965 (HC)

Duddhela Subbamma (Died) and ors. Vs. D.S. Krishna Murty and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-10-1965

Reported in : AIR1967AP8

kumarayya, j.(1) this appeal under c1. 15 of the letters patent is against the judgment and decree of justice seshachelapati in s. a. no. 270 of 1959. the short point involved relates to the binding effect of ex a-1 dated .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 24 1965 (HC)

Advocate-general, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Vs. V. Ramana Rao

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-24-1965

Reported in : AIR1967AP299; 1967CriLJ1470

..... cases was given to the registrar by this rule. but it cannot override the undoubted authority of the chief justice under clause 36 of the letters patent read with section 108(2) of the government of india act, 1915. the true construction of rule 3 therefore is that contempt applications which allege ..... under the constitution of courts act, 1952. indeed, the contempt rules do not purport to do so. the relevant portion of clause 36 of the letters patent of the madras high court (as amended in 1919) which applies to this court reads:'single judges and division courts' - and we do hereby declare ..... as superior court of record in england. the procedure and practice so followed in respect of contempt proceedings were continued under clause 38 of the letters patent which even today remain valid law. furthermore, the expression 'law' in art. 21 need not be construed in the context of contempt of courts as ..... with contempts of themselves: vide section 3. this procedure and practice have thus practically obtained the status of enacted law. clause 38 of the letters patent of the madras high court which applies to the high court of andhra pradesh also, reads:'and we do further ordain that the proceedings in all ..... and authority as they had at the commencement of that act. section 113 of the 1915 act empowered the establishment of new high courts by letters patent and the conferment on them of the same jurisdiction, powers and authority 'as are vested in or may be conferred on any high court existing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 1965 (HC)

G. Ranga Reddi and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-18-1965

Reported in : AIR1967AP14

..... at the hearing of the appeal observed thus:'it is true that this point was not raised by the appellant either before the learned single judge or before the letters patent bench, but it is a point of law chich arises on face of the record. the constitution of the regional transport authority and the state transport authority appears in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1965 (HC)

Natarajan (R.) and ors. Vs. Regional Assistant Commissioner of Labour ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-16-1965

Reported in : (1966)ILLJ310AP

..... no writ of mandamus lies against an incorporated company. against that judgment, only 28 out of the 41 writ petitioners filed the above appeal under clause (15) of the letters patent.5. the first question argued by the learned counsel for the appellants before us is that, so long as the settlements dated 1 july 1961 and 10 december 1962 were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1965 (HC)

Veluri Sitaramasastry and ors. Vs. Isukapalli Sundaramma and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-09-1965

Reported in : AIR1966AP173

..... was observed as follows: (at p. 1377).'a review is by no means an appeal in dis guise whereby an erroneous decision is reheard and corrected, but lies only for patent error. we do not consider that this furnishes a suitable occasion for dealing with this difference exhaustively or in any great detail but it would suffice for us to say .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1965 (HC)

Kallappa Vs. Sangamma

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-16-1965

Reported in : AIR1966AP181

..... letters patent of the said court. provided that it shall not be necessary to file copies of the judgment and decree appealed from. this proviso specifically dispenses with filing copies of judgment ..... copy ...'this does not contain the following words contained in order 41, rule 1 'unless the appellate court dispenses therewith.'4. order 41-b c. p. c. relates to letters patent appeals. rule 1 provides 'the rules of order xli-a shall apply, so far as may be, to appeals to the high court of madras under clause 15 of the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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