Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: andhra pradesh Year: 1991 Page 1 of about 21 results (0.045 seconds)

Apr 24 1991 (HC)

Syed Sadaq Ali and ors. Vs. the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-24-1991

Reported in : 1991(2)ALT403

..... petition, can grant even other relief which the court deems fit, certain other directions based on section 100 were issued. therefore, the petitioners could and should have filed a letters patent appeal against the relief refused and hence the bar of resjudicata is clearly attracted. the attempt to equate a refusal of relief sought for with a case of grant of ..... an adverse finding on the question of constitutionality and that the writ petitions were allowed and the petitioners could not have preferred any appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent.12. in our view, this submission is not correct. the petitioners sought for a specific relief of declaration that the provisions were unconstitutional and the said relief was refused. in ..... 30-11-1990 in the newspapers directing that fresh objections should be filed by 'any person' before 30-12-1990. the government of andhra pradesh in the meantime filed letters patent appeals, but the directions given by the learned single judge were affirmed in government of andhra pradesh v. p. narsimloo, 1991 (1) alt 370 by a division bench consisting of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 22 1991 (HC)

M/S. Ajay Constructions and Etc. Vs. Kakateeya Nagar Co-operative Hous ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-22-1991

Reported in : AIR1991AP294

..... on condition that they should have adequate septic tank and soakage pit facilities, the action of the municipality in allowing them to utilise the underground pipe line of habshiguda is patently illegal. he has also contended that the sole authority for granting permission for multistoried structure of this nature isthe huda alone and that the municipality cannot commit a breach of ..... construction of the flats has been violated and if the opinion of the committee of experts consisting of technical personnel is to be accepted, it would amount to legalising a patently illegal act which cannot be permitted under the terms of the permit granted by huda to m/s. ajay constructions for raising the multistoried structure. in such an event, the ..... outside the septic tanks and the soakage pits to be put up for this purpose. it is evident that m/s. ajay constructions could not be allowed to regularise a patent illegality committed by them by connecting their sewerage pipe line to the underground municipal pipe line of habshiguda for discharging the offensive material. this means that the permit condition for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 1991 (HC)

Bank of India, Vijayawada Vs. Katamaneni Suryanarayana and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-05-1991

Reported in : AIR1992AP345; 1992(1)ALT125

..... , 1932 or 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'.6. in the decision reported in indian bank, alamuru v. m. krishnamurthy, air 1983 ap 347, a division bench consisting of p.a. choudary and p. kodandaramayya, jj., held that ..... the words, '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 also offensive to article 14 of the constitution and accordingly the last part of s. 4(e) is void'.this decision of our high court is overruled by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1991 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T.N. Viswanatha Reddy

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-05-1991

Reported in : (1991)98CTR(AP)49; [1991]190ITR266(AP)

..... noticed, learned standing counsel contended that the decision of this court in kangundi industrial works (p.) ltd. v. ito : [1980]121itr339(ap) , though subsequent to the assessment order, exposes the patent error permeating the assessment order and, therefore, the income-tax officer was well within his authority in rectifying the assessment order based upon a binding decision of this court. he ..... rectification, it could not be said that there was a patent mistake vitiating the assessment order. in fact, at that stage, he was confronted with the decision of the gujarat high court in bharat textile works : [1978]114itr28(guj) which took ..... interpretation of section 214. it is not possible to say that the income-tax officer, while passing the assessment order dated april 14, 1975, had fallen into a manifest or patent error in allowing interest under section 214. even at the stage when the income-tax officer clutched at his jurisdiction under section 154 by issuing a show cause notice proposing ..... , it is contended by learned counsel for the respondent-assessee, sri y. ratnakar, that there is neither a mistake in the assessment order nor is the mistake, if any, a patent or obvious mistake. to support his contention that the subsequent decisions do not afford justification for invoking the powers under section 154, learned counsel cited certain decisions of the calcutta .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 13 1991 (HC)

The Commissioner and Spl. Officer, Anakapalli Municipality Vs. the Dir ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-13-1991

Reported in : AIR1992AP212; 1991(2)ALT354

orderm. jagannadha rao, j. 1. this letters patent appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned single judge dated 25-4-1988 dismissing the first appeal -- a.s. no. 1499 of 1981. the appellant before us is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 1991 (HC)

The Govt. of A.P. Through Secretary, Irrigation Department and ors. Vs ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-05-1991

Reported in : 1991(1)ALT496

..... bom. 399 holding that orders of rejection of applications for condonation of delay under section 5 of the limitation act are appealable under clause 15 of letters patent. we respectfully dissent from the judgments of the calcutta high court in gobinda lal v. shiba das, (1906) 33 cal. 1323 and full bench ..... condone delay under section 5 of the limitation act amounts to a 'judgment' within the meaning of the said words in clause 15 of the letters patent (madras), as applicable to this court.5. the supreme court has recently considered this question elaborately in shah babulal khimji's case (2) above ..... as appeals preferred by the state are concerned3. on the basis of the above contentions, two points arise for consideration :(1) whether a letters patent appeal lies at the instance of a defendant, against an order passed by the learned single judge refusing to condone the delay under section 5 of ..... , for the government pleader that the letters patent appeal is maintainable. it is further contended by her that the reasons for condonation fall within the parameters laid down by the supreme court recently, ..... air l981 sc 1786.2. learned counsel for the respondent (plaintiff) sri p.v. narayana rao, however, raised a preliminary objection, that no letters patent appeal lies against an order refusing to condone delay under section 5 of the limitation act. on the other hand, it is contended by mrs. indira ram .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 1991 (HC)

Anam Lakshmamma (Died) by R. Mangamma Vs. Anam Venkatarama Reddy and o ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-11-1991

Reported in : 1992(1)ALT93

..... as the legal representatives of the 3rd defendant in o.s.no. 48/1974 on the file of sub-court, kavali. the letters patent appeal is filed against the concurrent judgments of the learned single judge and of the trial judge by which a 1/3rd share has been granted to the respondents-plaintiffs .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 14 1991 (HC)

Zulaiqa Be and anr. Vs. Mohd. Mahamood Khan

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-14-1991

Reported in : 1991(2)ALT432

jagannadha rao, j. 1. this letters patent appeal is preferred by the defendants 1 and 2 against the judgment of the learned single judge in ccca no. 304/82 dt. 13-3-91 confirming the judgment of ..... date of the gift. 13. for all the aforesaid reasons, we confirm the finding of the lower courts that the gift in favour of the plaintiff is valid. the betters patent appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 1991 (HC)

The Govt. of A.P. Rep. by Its Principal Secretary, Irrigation and C.A. ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-01-1991

Reported in : 1991(2)ALT378

..... by him is in respect of a non-statutory contract. in fact, on the principle underlying section 96(3) c.p.c., no appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent would lie against the said consent order. in k.c. dora v. k.c. annamanaidu : [1974]2scr655 the supreme court clarified that the bar to an appeal against a consent ..... neither detrimental to the interests of the state nor opposed to public policy. the learned counsel has also raised the contention that no appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent lies against the order of the single judge which in substance and reality was based upon the consent of the parties--through their counsel. the learned counsel submits that any ..... was resumed, the writ appeal against the review wpmp 8015/90 was on the file of this court. however, the filing of writ appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent against the review order had, by that time, become barred by limitation. no petition to condone the delay was filed till the date of the resumed hearing. hence, the writ ..... arbitrator concluded, but the arbitrator has been restrained from passing the award by virtue of the interim order issued by us. no writ appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent was filed initially against the order dismissing the review petition. when the writ appeal filed against the order in the writ petition came up for hearing and the learned advocate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 19 1991 (HC)

Mohammed Zaffar Vs. the Government of Andhra Pradesh and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-19-1991

Reported in : 1992(1)ALT354; 1993CriLJ519

..... undoubtedly to be affective but it does not carry with it the right to be represented by a legal practitioner before the advisory board. moreover, in these cases it is patently clear that the detenus have not made the request for the assistance of a legal advisor or practitioner till the very last moment on 22-6-91 when the meeting .....

Tag this Judgment!


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