Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: andhra pradesh Year: 2002 Page 4 of about 70 results (0.036 seconds)

Jan 23 2002 (HC)

D. Surender Reddy and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh Represented

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-23-2002

Reported in : 2002(1)ALD(Cri)351; 2002(1)ALT(Cri)419; 2002CriLJ2611

..... against the accused or the complaint does not disclose the essential ingredients of an offence which is alleged against the accused. (2) where the allegations made in the complaint are patently absurd and inherently improbable so that no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (3) where the discretion exercised by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 2002 (HC)

Competant Authority, Under the A.P. Slum Improvement (Acquisition of L ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-24-2002

Reported in : 2002(5)ALD272

..... by the competent civil court. in para 8 of the said report, it was held thus: '8. we are of the view that the high court not only fell into patent error but also exceeded its jurisdiction under article 226 of the constitution of india. though the jurisdiction of the high court under article 226 of the constitution is not confined .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 2002 (HC)

Gade Ramulu and ors. Vs. District Collector and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-20-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)ALD393; 2003(1)ALT473

..... of the 3rd respondent had been passed pursuant to an enquiry behind the back of the petitioners and without notice and opportunity to them; (b) that the 3rd respondent had patently no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter under the provisions of the act inasmuch as the acquisition of the lands by the petitioners in the 1950s brings them within the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 2002 (HC)

Dasari Uma Maheswara Rao and anr. Vs. Somasi Venkata Ramachandra Murth ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-06-2002

Reported in : 2002(6)ALD767; 2003(2)ALT135

..... counsel for review petitioners, i am of the considered opinion that several of the grounds are matters to be decided, if the judgments of the division bench in this letters patent are questioned before the regular forum and not by filing the review application at any rate in view of the limitations imposed by law under order 47, rule 1 of ..... that such an error is one apparent on the face of the record. in v. ramakrishan's case (supra) while dealing with the powers of the appellate court in letters patent jurisdiction the division bench had observed as follows: 'the object of order 41, rule 33 of the code of civil procedure is clearly to enable the court to do complete ..... through the findings which had been recorded in the common judgment while disposal of lpas and had also submitted that to defeat the judgment and decree made in this letters patent, several technical objections are being raised now relating to maintainability of the cross-objections and the non-bringing of legal representatives on the ground that a particular finding became final ..... and it operates as res judicata. sri ramachandra murthy while explaining the scope of the letters patent jurisdiction had commented that the letters patent jurisdiction is of wider scope and while disposing of the letters patent appeal the substantial rights of the parties are to be worked out and in substance that is what had been actually done .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 2002 (HC)

Jangili Venkateswarlu and ors. Vs. Bandaru Omkaraiah and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-11-2002

Reported in : 2003(2)ALD259; 2003(3)ALT612

..... since the plaintiffs did not choose to challenge the said finding as upheld by the learned single judge in 2132 of 1984.18. this letters patent appeal is at the instance of the defendants and having regard to the contentions raised by the learned counsel, the only question that arises for determination is whether the ..... to recovery of possession.16. sri t. seshagiri rao, advocate whose name appeared in the cause list for the respondents/plaintiffs, reported no instructions to continue in the letters patent appeal. in the circumstances, we proceeded to decide the appeal on the basis of the material on record and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants. ..... for proceeding according to law after permitting the plaintiffs to amend the plaint. the said judgment of the learned appellate judge dated 3-9-1996 is questioned in this letters patent appeal by the defendants in os no. 61 of 1970.15. we have heard sri k. harinath, the learned counsel for the appellants/ defendants. the learned counsel vehemently ..... plaintiffs. consequently the judgment and decree of the trial court in 61 of 1970 dismissing the suit is confirmed.33. in the result, the letters patent appeal is allowed. in the circumstances there shall be no order as to costs. ..... g. rohini, j. 1. the defendants are the appellants in this letters patent appeal which is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 3.9.1996 in (tr.) a.s. no. 2132 of 1984 whereunder the learned single judge set aside .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 2002 (HC)

A. Narayan Rao Vs. Shanta Bai and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-17-2002

Reported in : 2004(2)ALD585; 2004(3)ALT104

..... . the trial court decreed the suit with interest. on appeal by the defendant a learned single judge of this court dismissed the suit as barred by limitation. in the letter patent appeal filed against the judgment of the learned single judge, the plaintiffs paid court fee on the value of the goods with interest till date of suit. registry took an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 2002 (HC)

Sham Sunder Rao and ors. Vs. Sri Saraswathi Vidya Peetham, Hyderabad

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-16-2002

Reported in : 2002(3)ALD346; 2002(4)ALT645

..... . pragna m. pai, air 1998 sc 424, considered the question whether the provision of section 6 of the specific relief act would bar an appeal under clause (15) of letters patent. in that case, the decree under section 6 of the said act was passed by a learned single judge of the high court. an appeal was filed against that judgment ..... and decree under letters patent before a division bench of bombay high court. the supreme court held that clause (15) of the letters patent, which is a charter under which the high court of bombay functions, would not have been whittled down by the statutory .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 10 2002 (HC)

Thiruvalkani K. Nagaraj Vs. Thiruvalkani Sarojamma and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-10-2002

Reported in : 2002(4)ALD481; 2002(6)ALT429

..... respondents in bringing it existence sale deeds in respect of some of the items of the suit property in violation of the undertaking given by them as held the letters patent bench) that they would not alienate the suit property during the pendency of appeal, is but an act of violation of an order of implied injunction against them.12. respondents ..... of the appeal was granted by a learned single judge and was confirmed with a modification in appeal cannot be taken as an injunction granted by a letters patent bench, and so letters patent bench cannot pass an order under order 39, rule 2-a cpc and dismissed the said cmp with a further observation that dismissal of that cmp cannot be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 17 2002 (HC)

Arvind L. Abhyankar Vs. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-17-2002

Reported in : AIR2003AP94; 2002(5)ALD763; 2003(1)ALT336

..... builder. the fact that the officials of the corporation were aware of the constructions being made by the builder is evident from the inspection file produced before this court. this patently exposes their nexus with the builder. had the officials of the corporation been diligent and prompt in taking steps to stop the illegal and unauthorised constructions, the builder would not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 2002 (HC)

M. Subbarayulu Vs. Sri Ambuja Petrochemicals Ltd.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-01-2002

Reported in : 2003(4)ALT10

s.r. nayak, j.1. this appeal preferred under section 483 of the companies act, 1956, read with clause 15 of the letters patent is directed against the order of the learned company judge dated 26-3-2002 in c.a. no. 531 of 2000 in rcc no. 4 of 1997. c.a. no. .....

Tag this Judgment!

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