Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: andhra pradesh Year: 1986 Page 1 of about 6 results (0.049 seconds)

Jan 23 1986 (HC)

Mahindra and Mahindra Limited and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-23-1986

Reported in : [1986]63STC274(AP)

..... any infirmity by the mere fact that the name of the manufacturer is mentioned. the notification may facilitate the identification with reference to the manufacturer. if the goods obtain their patent or trade name it is enough if those names are mentioned. in fact g.o. no. 676, revenue, dated 21st june, 1976, issued under section 9(1) giving concessional rates ..... notification. it is the goods that ultimately gets the benefit and brings the notification outside the preview of the charging section. it may use the names of manufacturer or the patent name or the locality - the object being the identity. 12. the respondents' counsel supplied a list of exemptions notified by the state government. we find them at page 2 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1986 (HC)

Andhra Bank Ltd. Vs. Bonu Narasamma

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-16-1986

Reported in : [1988]63CompCas328(AP)

..... section 21a, went further and held that section 21a is beyond the legislative competence of parliament and it is arbitrary and violative of article 14 of the constitution. it is patent that the learned judge appears to have been mainly swayed by injustice in charging compound interest particularly on amounts advanced to agriculturists. the accent on agriculturists indebtedness and the protection ..... 1938 postulating 'any debt due to any corporation formed in pursuance of an act of parliament of the united kingdom or any special indian law or royal charter or letters patent' is struck down and the banks can recover interest from agriculturists only at the rates permitted under section 13 of act iv of 1938. subsequent to this decision, section 21a ..... from the companies act and have been compressed into an independent act with separate entity. the definition of banking in section 5(b) is of wide amplitude and it is patent from the definition and statement of objects and reasons that the primary and predominant purpose of the bank is to accept deposits and safeguard the interest of deposit holders. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 1986 (HC)

Damordardass Agarwal and ors. Vs. R. Badrilal and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-08-1986

Reported in : AIR1987AP254

..... in this connection to briefly notice both the legislative history and the judicial pronouncements on this question.15. it is to be noticed that under cls. 9 and 10, letters patent, or charter granted by the crown of england under which the high courts of allahabad, bombay, calcutta and madras were constituted, those courts were given power to admit advocates, vakils ..... its provisions came into force on different dates as per the notifications to be issued and the existing law embodied in the local enactments and the bar councils act, letters patent of the several high courts shall stand repealed as envisaged in s. 50 of the act on different far as the legal practitioners act and the legal practitioners ..... these questions based on principles of common law in some of the decided cases. we have already noticed that the advocates, attorneys, and vakils were admitted under cl. 9, letters patent. the earliest judgment of rama v. kunji (1886) ilr 9 mad 375 of the year 1886 for the first time recognises the right of the legal practitioner to sue for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 1986 (HC)

Togendranath Raj and anr. Vs. State Bank of India

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-18-1986

Reported in : [1988]63CompCas405(AP)

..... , or any debt due to any corporation formed in pursuance of an act of parliament (of the united kingdom) or of any special indian law or royal charter or letters patent.' 37. the contention of the lic was that it is a corporation formed in pursuance of 'any special indian law', and hence the debt due to it cannot be scaled .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 25 1986 (HC)

Amarchand Shanna Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-25-1986

Reported in : AIR1988AP45

..... supplied. 9. the allegation that the 2nd respondent has always been antagonistic towards the petitioner-firm and has been trying to cause as much harm as possible is baseless and patently untrue, as it is clear from the fact that the tenders for the work under reference were issued by the 2nd respondent to the petitioner-firm in first call. thereafter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 01 1986 (HC)

Tahera Sayeed Vs. M. Shanmugam and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-01-1986

Reported in : AIR1987AP206

1. the petitioner is possessed of the house bearing no. 10-2-287/1 in a. c. guards, santhinagar, hyderabad which respondent 3, periaswamy purchased in two portions, a portion in the name of his wife and daughter (respondents 4 and 5) and b portion in his name, under two sale-deeds dated march 31, 1978 and july 15, 1979, respectively. it is the case of the petitioner that the cheques issued by periaswamy as consideration for the sale of b portion house were bounced and thus received no consideration; thereby periaswamy played fraud on her. on demand, periaswamy surrendered possession of the b portion under ex. a-4 affidavit dated september 4, 1980. the petitioner laid the suit, o. s. no. 1307/80 which was renumbered as o. s. no. 306/82 in the court of the addl. chief judge, city civil court, hyderabad, to declare that the sale as invalid or for specific performance. he also filed i.a. 1492/80 against periaswamy for ad interim injunction restraining him from interfering with her possession. interim injunction was granted and it was made absolute, which was upheld by this court in c.m.a. 240/81 dated july 29, 1981.2. while the matters stood thus, it emerges that periaswamy purported to have executed an agreement of sale dated november 30, 1979 under ex. b3 in respect of a and b portions, in favour of shanmukham. for enforcement thereof, immediately, a suit c.s. 61/82 was filed in the high court of madras for specific performance of the properties at hyderabad, which was decreed .....

Tag this Judgment!

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