Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: andhra pradesh Year: 1999 Page 1 of about 56 results (0.041 seconds)

Jun 23 1999 (HC)

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Manjampalli Mallamma and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-23-1999

Reported in : 2000(1)ALT9

..... they are carrying with them small quantities of rice and personal belongings.10. a division bench of this court in ravulapalli subbamma @ subbuhu's case (2 supra) while allowing letter patents appeal, held that the insurance company cannot be fastened with any liability even in the case of death of passengers who are carried for hire or reward in a lorry .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 1999 (HC)

Mandava Lokeswara Rao Vs. Devineni Vijaya Lakshmi

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-13-1999

Reported in : 1999(3)ALD663; 1999(4)ALT49

..... the said judgments. the conclusions reached by the trial court and the learned single judge are correct and as such no interference in this letters patent appeal is warranted. thus, there is no merit in anyone of the contentions raised by sri poornaiah, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant. ..... this opportunity.25. sri poornaiah, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant-defendant laid stress on the scope of clause 15 of the letters patent act thinking that we cannot interfere with the findings of the learned single judge and the trial court. we are aware of the scope ..... subordinate court. in such appellate jurisdiction the high court exercises the powers of a court of error. so understood, the appellate power under the letters patent is quite distinct, in, contrast to what is ordinarily understood in procedural language. that apart the construction of the afore-mentioned two documents involved, ..... 23. sri poornaiah, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant further contends that the power of the bench under section 15 of the letters patent act is not limited to interfere with the orders passed by the appellate court. to support his contention he placed reliance on the decision of ..... in., respect of 516 sq. yards in at yellareddyguda, kliairatabad taluk, hyderabad district.2. defendant is the appellant in this letters patent appeal. the suit in os no.613 of 1980 on the file of the learned v additional judge, city civil court, hyderabad was filed by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1999 (HC)

Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, A.P., Hyderabad Vs. White Hors ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-31-1999

Reported in : 2000(1)ALD739; 2000(1)ALT417

..... . it may however be contended that the commissioner may exercise the discretion to withhold approval for related reasons like labels contravening any law relating to obscenity or public morals or patently contravening any trade mark law. such discretion may be implied on the principle that a public authority cannot be expected to affix its seal of approval on anything, which is ..... patently illegal. this question does not arise in this case.31. the impugned letter dated 14-6-1999 under which the request for the approval of the labels of the petitioner .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 1999 (HC)

M. Ramanamma Vs. Commissioner of Survey Settlement and Land Records, H ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-13-1999

Reported in : 2000(2)ALD124; 2000(2)ALT276

..... proceedings cannot be equated with the original hearing of the case and the finality of the judgment delivered by the court will not be reconsidered except where aglaring omission or patent mistake or like grave error has crept in order by judicial fallibility.12. in vijaya bai v. shriram tukaram, : air1999sc431 , the supreme court while dealing with section 49-b of ..... court may recall an order earlier made by if it (i) the proceedings culminating into an order suffer from the inherent lack of jurisdiction and such lack of jurisdiction in patent, (ii) there exists fraud or collusion in obtaining the judgment, (iii) there has been a mistake of the court, prejudicing a party or (iv) a judgment was rendered in ignorance .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 24 1999 (HC)

P. Prakash Archbald Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-24-1999

Reported in : 2000(2)ALD44

..... -1999 which, at any rate, is in the nature of a step towards exercise of the power of review/ reconsideration of the earlier order dated 5-11-1999, is incompetent, patently and manifestly without jurisdiction and ultra viresthe provisions of the act. the impugned order is accordingly set aside.8. sri mohan reddy, learned counsel for the party-respondents, however, would ..... the fact that the statutory provision does not grant any power of revision of the orders passed in exercise thereof, the impugned are dated 9-11-1999 is inherently and patently ultra vires section 34 of the act, without jurisdiction and non est.3. this court by order dated 18-11-1999 in wpmp no.30098 of 1999 suspended the impugned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 17 1999 (HC)

Vellalacheruvu Fishermen Cooperative Society, Prakasam Dist. and Anoth ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-17-1999

Reported in : 1999(5)ALD657

..... .301 of 1999 cannot claim that they are legally admitted members of the society and they have locus standi inthe contempt case, more so having filed contempt appeal and letters patent appeal and withdrew them. for all these reasons, the application is dismissed with costs. advocate's fee rs.5,000/-.31. before deciding whether the contemnor flouted the orders of ..... for hearing they withdrew the same stating that they would like to file lpa against the said order on 25-9-1998. thereafter, they seemed to have filed a letters patent appeal and the same seemed to have come up before a division bench in sr stage on 25-9-1998 and their lordships while directing the office to post the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 31 1999 (HC)

iqbal Begum Vs. Chote Miyan

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-31-1999

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!

Jun 25 1999 (HC)

Madan Gopal Badari Narayana Firm Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Civil Suppl ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-25-1999

Reported in : 1999(4)ALD221

..... of the order passed by the 2nd respondent as well as the appellate order passed by the 1st respondent do not disclose any patent error or infirmity, nor could the counsel for the petitioner point out any such patent error or legal infirmity warranting interference by this court under article 226 of the constitution of india. a perusal of the appellate order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 1999 (HC)

KhairuddIn Ali and ors. Vs. State of A.P. and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-24-1999

Reported in : 1999(2)ALD496; 1999(2)ALT727

..... as regards the manner of decision-making, the writ need not issue 'ex debito justitiae'. we cannot condemn an order which is vitiated by certain infirmities and thereby allow a patently illegal order passed without jurisdiction, to hold its sway. in a matter of this nature, we cannot adopt a truncated approach and bring about a result leading to miscarriage of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1999 (HC)

Karumilli Bharathi Vs. Prichikala Venkatachalam

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-28-1999

Reported in : 1999(3)ALD366; 1999(3)ALT407

..... cannot be equated with the original hearing of the case, since the finality of the judgment delivered by the court will not be reconsidered except 'where a glaring omission or patent mistake or like graveerror has crept in earlier by judicial fallibility'. in other words, 'an error apparent on the face of the record' is one where there is a glaring ..... omission or a patent' mistake or a grave error in judgment rendered. in meera bhanja's case (supra), the hon'ble supreme court further clarified the phrase 'error apparent on the face of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

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