Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: andhra pradesh Year: 2004 Page 2 of about 62 results (0.038 seconds)

Nov 18 2004 (HC)

Eranki Srerama Murthy and ors. Vs. Eranki Atchuta Venkata Subramanyam ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-18-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)ALD817

..... and of the learned single judge that ex.b.12 is not vitiated by fraud, undue influence, misrepresentation or coercion, no interference is called for by us in this letters patent appeal. we have gone through the record and are satisfied that the findings recorded are borne on record and the view taken by the trial court as well as the ..... . by the same judgment, cross-objections of the defendants for costs were also dismissed. thus, confirming the judgment and decree of the trial court, the appeal was dismissed. this letters patent appeal is against the said judgment and decree.9. we heard the learned counsel for the parties and were taken through the record. on the issue that the settlement deed ..... devinder gupta, c.j.1. this letters patent appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by the learned single judge of this court in a.s. no. 2108 of 1993 dismissing the appeal of the plaintiffs/ .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2004 (HC)

A. Subramanyam Naidu and ors. Vs. the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Co ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-30-2004

Reported in : 2005(5)ALD682; 2005(4)ALT684

..... not born in the cadre, the said promotees were pushed down as against the direct recruitees, it cannot be aid that it would cause great hardship. as there is a patent violation of quota rule, the result must follow and the promotees who remained in the office for all these years cannot take advantage of their long standing.46. with regard .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 2004 (HC)

S.K. Mahaboob Ali, Ex-crpf Constable Vs. Director General of Police, C ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-07-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)ALD530; 2005(1)ALT412; 2005(192)ELT143(AP)

..... between the earlier and later decisions of the supreme court consisting of equal number of judges, the later decision prevails. the majority of the full bench in govindanaik v. west patent press co. : air1980kant92 (f.b.) held that if two decisions of the supreme court on a question of law cannot be reconciled and one of them is by a larger .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 2004 (HC)

Sale Ranga Swamy Vs. Special Collector-cum-land Acquisition Officer, S ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-20-2004

Reported in : 2004(3)ALD83; 2004(2)ALT764

..... to the code of civil procedure in 1976 and the effect thereof, the division bench of this court b. santhamma v. b. koti reddy, (supra) observed as under:'it is patent that the applicability of section 5 is excluded. even under unamended provision section 5 would not have been made applicable but for the amendment crystallized into sub-rule (4) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 2004 (HC)

Jandhalaya Krishna Murthy Vs. Tullimilli Kotaiah

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-09-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)ALD205

..... and purpose of enactment. for this purpose, where necessary, the court may even depart from rule that the plain words should be interpreted according to their plain meaning to avoid patent injustice anomaly or absurdity or invalidation of a law (see : m/s. giridharilal and sons v. balbir nath mathur, : [1986]1scr383 ).24. the supreme court further observed in state of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 2004 (HC)

irrigation Development Employees Association and ors. Vs. Government o ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-16-2004

Reported in : 2004(2)ALD599; 2004(3)ALT17; (2004)IILLJ581AP; [2004]55SCL459(AP)

..... in service and those identified as surplus and offered vr scheme is a reasonable classification and does not violate article 14 of the constitution of india. the classification is not patently arbitrary as there is a definite object sought to be achieved by making such classification.61. before we proceed to examine the rival submissions, it is just and necessary to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 28 2004 (HC)

Challapalli Ravi and ors. Vs. Sri B. Krupanandam, I.A.S., Secretary, I ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-28-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)ALT249

..... bona fide one, since the subsequent events even after admission of the contempt case disclose the continuous disobedience to the order of the court. the transgression is so serious and patent, leaves us with no option except to punish the respondents for contempt of court. an idea must not be harboured that a person who has willfully committed a breach to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 01 2004 (HC)

G. Rama Sharma Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Legisla ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-01-2004

Reported in : 2005(4)ALD503; 2005(4)ALT98

..... of india v. h.c. goel : (1964)illj38sc , this court held that if the conclusion, upon consideration of the evidence, reached by the disciplinary authority, is perverse or suffers from patent error on the face of the record or based on no evidence at all, a writ of certiorari could be issued.14. in the light of parameters of judicial review .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 2004 (HC)

Hyderabad Co-operative Trading Society Limited Vs. Authority Under A.P ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-06-2004

Reported in : 2004(1)ALD742; [2004(101)FLR357]

..... officer, thandla, : [2002]supp5scr116 , the supreme court while interpreting the tenancy and land laws opined that literal construction and plain meaning should be given effect to, unless it leads to patent injustice, anomaly, absurdity or invalidation of the law. reference to the statement of objects and reasons is permissible for understanding the background, the antecedent state of affairs, the surrounding circumstances .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 2004 (HC)

Chella Chenchaiah Vs. Commissioner, Appeals and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-17-2004

Reported in : 2004(2)ALD648; 2004(2)ALT657

..... determined by a bench of two-judges, observed:'the power to frame rules regulating its practice and the procedure conferred on the high court under preliminary enactments and the letters patent is preserved by article 225 of the constitution, corresponding to section 223 of the government of india act, 1935. the appellate side rules having been made by the high court .....

Tag this Judgment!


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