Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: andhra pradesh Year: 2004 Page 5 of about 62 results (0.051 seconds)

Aug 20 2004 (HC)

Ambadas Vittal Gajul Vs. S.R. Bootla

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-20-2004

Reported in : 2004(6)ALD391

..... deceived or confused or misled.'these principles were also dealt with extensively by this court in sri sai agencies pvt. ltd. v. chintala rama rao, 1997 (5) ald 384 = 1997 patent and trade mark cases 17.11. even while applying these principles, it should be kept in mind that the grant of temporary injunction is a preventive action and that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 13 2004 (HC)

Mandadi Krishna Reddy Vs. Guggula Sreenivas Reddy

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-13-2004

Reported in : 2004(6)ALD638

..... with any one of the contentions raised by the learned counsel. since the initial order made in ia no. 571 of 2003, dated 7.1.2004 itself suffers from a patent erroneous exercise of jurisdiction, the mere fact that a consequential order has been passed in immaterial. it is also not open to the court to go into the merits of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 2004 (HC)

Banka Kama Raju (Died) by Lr Vs. Noone Kasiviswanadham (Died) by Lrs. ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-27-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)ALD141; 2005(2)ALT177

..... in an appeal in the high court, it enables the counsel to take steps not only in the appeal, but also in further appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent and to file application seeking leave to approach the supreme court, apart from participating in review applications. the authorization so given can be terminated, either at the instance of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 04 2004 (HC)

Gunda Rajanna Vs. P. Annapurna

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-04-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)ALD447

..... ratio laid down in the said cases is not applicable to the case on hand.9. for the aforesaid reasons, i do not find any error of jurisdiction or any patent grave error of law in the order under revision, warranting interference under article 227 of the constitution of india. accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed. no costs.

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 2004 (HC)

Jeenu Nookaraju and ors. Vs. Chakravarthula Venkata Raghava Charyuly a ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-30-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)ALD745; 2005(2)ALT215

..... single judge by a separate order dated 23rd january 1998, which is the subject-matter of the present appeal instituted on 24th september, 1998 and it was registered as letters patent appeal no. 2 of 1999. before the present appeal was instituted, the learned single judge also decided the main appeal (a.s. no. 3326 of 1982) itself on 2nd february .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 07 2004 (HC)

A.P. State Electricity Board and ors. Vs. Sree Rayalaseema Alkalies an ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-07-2004

Reported in : 2004(6)ALT421

..... this court in vbc ferro alloys ltd. v. ap.s.e.b. : 2000(5)ald626 (f.b.) held that the tariff fixation can be declared unconstitutional only if it is patently arbitrary, irrational, discriminatory or demonstrably irrelevant. the tariff fixation by the board is legislative in character. in the aforementioned decision, the board's proceedings b.p.ms. no. 298 dated .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 2004 (HC)

The General Manager, South Central Railway Vs. K. Narayana Rao

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-28-2004

Reported in : I(2005)ACC239; 2005ACJ1249; AIR2004AP442; 2004(4)ALT464

s.r.k. prasad, j.1. this l.p.a is directed against the judgment rendered by the learned single judge of this court in c.m.a.no.1214 of 1999 dismissing the appeal and confirming the awarding of compensation in o.a.a.no.121 of 1998 dated 22.1.1999 by the railway claims tribunal, secunderabad bench. 2. the appellant is the railways whereas the claimant is the respondent herein. they will be arrayed as in the claim petition. the claimants being the husband and daughter of the deceased venkatalakshmi have claimed compensation of a sum of rs.2,00,000/- alleging that his wife fell down from the train near gooty railway station while travelling in the second class railway compartment along with them from madras to guntakal, crushed in between the train and the platform resulting in her instantaneous death. the claimants have produced the first information report, inquest report, the original copy of the ticket coupon, the original copy of the excess fare ticket of the deceased and also the salary certificate of the deceased, who was employed as a nursing tutor. subsequently her daughter has given up her claim. the same is resisted by the railways on the ground that the death occurred on account of the negligence and careless act of the deceased who attempted to step down from the moving train before taking a stop on the platform at gooty station and as such no compensation was payable in view of proviso (b) to section 124 of the railways act, 1989. it was, however, admitted in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 12 2004 (HC)

Eureka Estates (P) Ltd. Vs. A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Com ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-12-2004

Reported in : AIR2005AP118; 2004(6)ALD212; 2004(6)ALT46

..... not covered by appropriate grounds of review as permitted by order xlvii rule 1 of the code of civil procedure. there is no discovery of new facts or any other patent errors on the face of the record, which alone could have enabled the commission to exercise the power of review.13. sri e. manohar, learned senior counsel, appearing on behalf .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2004 (HC)

M. Nagamma Vs. D.A. Nathan and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-13-2004

Reported in : AIR2005AP69; 2004(6)ALD274; 2004(6)ALT516

..... -1963 (ap) reversed; and at paras 1 and 5 of the judgment the division bench of this court held:the appellant in this appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent filed the suit out of which the appeal arises for a mandatory injunction for removal of certain obstructions placed on plots marked 2(a) and 3(a) in the plan .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 2004 (HC)

Manik Halder S/O Rishikant Halder Vs. Polamraju Lavanya W/O P.L.N. Pra ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-15-2004

Reported in : 2005(2)ALD204; 2005(2)ALT334

orders.r.k. prasad, j.1. the tenant has preferred this revision against the judgment and decree dated 30.7.2003 in r.c.a.no.9 of 2001 on the file of the principal senior civil judge-cum-rent control appellate authority, ongole, ordering eviction.2. the facts that are required for consideration can be stated as follows: the respondent, who is landlady, has sought eviction of the revision petitioner being the tenant from the schedule premises on two grounds, namely, wilful default in payment of rents and bona fide requirement for personal use. the same is resisted by the tenant stating that she was accepting the rents sent by money orders and he had not committed any wilful default. it is also contended by the tenant that several shops in possession of the landlady fell vacant and she did not commence any business. she does not require the premises bona fide for occupation. it is also contended that she has not disclosed the nature of business, which she proposes to commence. after enquiry the learned rent controller, ongole negatived both contentions of the petitioner and dismissed the eviction application in r.c.c.no.8 of 2000. thereupon, the matter is carried by the landlady in appeal before the principal senior civil judge, ongole. the appellate authority allowed r.c.a.no.9 of 2001 accepting the contentions of the landlady on the ground of bona fide personal use while confirming the finding relating to wilful default arrived at by the rent controller. thereupon, he has .....

Tag this Judgment!


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