Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Page 3 of about 5,310 results (0.028 seconds)

Jan 09 2017 (HC)

M/s. Maya Appliances Private Limited, Besant Avenue, Adyar, Chennai an ...

Court : Chennai

..... which are the subject matter of the suit, thus becomes a achilles heel. the functionality of the aspect of framelessness is also admitted, as seen through the application for patent, advertisements made on in the pleadings of the plaint. there are certain admissions made on the similarities on the products, which underwent prior publication and subsequently registered by the ..... into it. the applicants are the prior user/registered proprietor under the designs act, 2000. their application for innovation qua the inventional aspects, is pending before the controller of patent. the respondent has also filed an application under section 19 of the designs act, 2000. there are other persons, who got the registration, of which, one is for ..... relief. appropriate steps would be taken to cancel the said registrations. they stand on a different footing than that of the respondent. the applications filed for registration under the patent act, would not take away the rights under the designs act. there is no material contradiction in the stand taken by the applicants in the pleadings. accordingly, the ..... that the respondent is also a reputed concern having wide turnover than the applicants. advertisement of the applicants also includes the statement that the products have been registered under the patent act, though factually incorrect. both the counsels addressed the court sprinkling with numerous citations. 14. submission of the applicants:- the learned senior counsel appearing for the applicants/ .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 1966 (HC)

A.P.K. Narayanaswami Chettiar Firm Vs. V.K. Perumal Chettiar and Sons

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1966)2MLJ318

..... the dispute related to a design and not to a patent was lost sight of. the suit relating to a design, the order of transfer cannot be sustained. it is represented at the bar for the defendant that ..... of course. i am not now called upon to discuss the matter.4. it is not contended before me that the present case has anything to do with patents. on a perusal of the affidavit and counter in the matter and the order made it is obvious that somehow when the application was made, the fact that ..... the proviso to section 29(1) in respect of designs. nor by any provision under the act are the provisions relating to transfer of suits on infringement of patent made applicable to legal proceedings in respect of designs. section 54 of the act is of limited application as it only provides that the provisions of the act ..... to a design and covered by part ii of the act, is completely overlooked and the averments proceed as if the suit relates to an infringement of a patent. it is then stated that the defendant was entitled to take grounds by way of defence under section 26 of the act and the suit must be transferred ..... transfer of a suit on his file to this court, to be tried on the original side, purporting to act under sections 26 and 29 of the indian patents and designs act, 1911. the suit was instituted by the plaintiff under section 53 of the act for piracy of a design. the cause of action for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 2017 (HC)

Dr. G. Srinivasan Vs. Voltamp Transformers Limited, Chetpet and Others

Court : Chennai

..... defendant at sivaganga. therefore, without establishing the infringement, the plaintiff, merely on the basis of some photocopy of the diagram, cannot claim that there is an infringement of patent. as already stated above, he has not even sought any expert opinion to compare the two transformers to prove the alleged infringement. without expert's opinion comparing the plaintiff ..... would not enable an average skilled person in the field to construct such transformer. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the defendants that the plaintiff has obtained patent, without disclosing any inventive steps, in order to prevent the others from carrying on their legitimate business in the same field. therefore, the learned counsel for the defendants ..... that he is an expert in erecting, installing, low tension and high tension transformers substations. the plaintiff has also failed to get technical analysis report comparing the plaintiff's patent specifications with the transformers manufactured and installed by 1st defendant on the orders placed by 3rd defendant. further, the alleged circuit diagram displayed at the site of 3rd defendant ..... for power production and distribution. he also had discussions with the tamil nadu electricity board for possible implementation of the said project. according to the plaintiff, in the said patent for "midget transformers" he has mentioned a particular type of transformer, which is coded as 363 digitally and dyyn 11 in vector group, and the same consists of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 16 1979 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ashok Leyland Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [1981]130ITR900(Mad)

..... ) of clause 13. clause 13 states that the amount of 5,000 per annum would be paid ' by way of royalty for the supply of technical information, use of leyland patents, supply of standard velo-graphs, technical data, machine loading and other similar and necessary technical information normally supplied by leyland in accordance with their practice in other countries'. this clause ..... of 5,000 per annum for a period of five years from the date of this agreement by way of royalty for the supply of technical information, use of leyland patents, supply of standard velographs, technical data machine loading and other similar and necessary technical information normally supplied by leyland in accordance with their practice in other countries. the first ..... acquired merely technical knowledge or knowledge for the manufacture of any particular item for a specified duration, then he had acquired only a licence to use the other party's patent and knowledge and the amount would constitute ' revenue expenditure '.' 7. therefore, in determining the allowability of the amount, we have to be guided only by the terms of the agreement ..... the rate of 5,000 for a period of five years from the date of the agreement by way of royalty for the supply of technical information, use of leyland patents, supply of standard velographs, technical data relating to machine loading and other similar and necessary technical information normally supplied by leyland in accordance with their practice in other countries. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 2004 (HC)

S.P.S. Jayam and Co. Vs. the Registrar, Tamilnadu Taxation Special Tri ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2004)3MLJ74; [2004]137STC117(Mad)

..... , 1977), the court observed as under:-' this definition also shows that the expression signifies 'things and rights considered as having a money value'. even incorporeal rights like trade marks, copyrights, patents or rights in personam capable of transfer or transmission, such as debts, are also included in its ambit.' the court, in the later part of the said judgment, again observed ..... as follows:- ' similarly, patents, copyrights and other rights in rem which are not rights over land are also included within the meaning of movable property.' c. volume 112 stc 370 (commissioner of sales tax .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 2016 (HC)

M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited Bombay Pune Road Akurdi Vs. M/s. TVS Motor Com ...

Court : Chennai

..... of the indian evidence act, and marking of press reports and other documents viz. exs.p24 to p27, under section 64(2)(1) of the patents act. the learned judge after taking into consideration, the rival submissions, has directed the learned master to mark the documents and record the objections raised, ..... secret trial/research between the respondent/plaintiff and a third party and the same is not in consonance with section 64(2)(1) of the patents act. 9. it is the primordial submission of the learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant/defendant, that the judgment rendered by the hon' ..... the respondent/defendant therein from using the technology or manufacturing/marketing flame motorcycle or any other product that allegedly infringes the applicant's (plaintiff therein) patent no.195904. 3(iii) the facts relating to the litigation's in the form of above said suits, have been narrated in detail and in ..... 's product viz. tvs flame, which uses the two spark plug with screw fitted and three valves, does not infringe the patent no.195904 of bajaj auto limited (applicant herein) and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from issuance of threats that the plaintiff is infringing the ..... defendant's patent no.195904 and from interfering with the launch and sale of the product tvs flame, and also to direct the defendant to compensate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 1958 (HC)

Blackwood and Sons Ltd. and ors. Vs. A.N. Parasuraman and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1959Mad410

..... am unable to conceive of the possibility of such a course without attributing a local situation to that right.62. earlier i have set out instances of intangible rights like patents and trade marks as affording an analogy for reaching a decision in relation to copyright. the basis of the rule in those cases is to be found in the two ..... a debt be stipulated it will be there situate, the general rule notwithstanding. a cause of action in contract or tort is situate where action may be brought upon it. patents and trade marks are situate where they can be transferred on the same principle as shares in companies......the inference, however, must not be rawn that because no personal property ..... principle which fixes 'situs' with reference to the jurisdiction where the right could be enforced, and (3) lastly the analogy furnished by comparable intangible rights such as patents and trade marks (as to patents see 1932 ac 23858. if the intangible right whose situs has to be determined is a statutory right and owes its existence to a statute enacted by a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 01 2016 (HC)

R. Muralidharan Vs. The Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice and Othe ...

Court : Chennai

..... as observed by us, the rub is only the fee to be paid at the entry point. to the extent that an invention is not patentable in india, the benefit of deleting the same at entry point has already been granted. the application of disclaimer, correction or explanation as envisaged ..... international application in accordance with the provisions contained in rule 14. this is stated to be with the objective that since some claims are not patentable in india, those claims can be deleted at the stage of filing of the application. 10. the learned assistant solicitor general also does not dispute ..... said act and may be prescribed by the central government as it deems fit. 9. the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to plead that the patent (amendment) rules, 2016 have been issued on 16.5.2016 and are to be made applicable from the date of their notification. the learned ..... what the petitioner claims is that the disclaimer, correction or explanation should be permitted prior to the entry stage, so that those aspects of patent which are not patentable in india will not be required to be included in application and fee paid on the same. thus, the endeavour is really a fee ..... said act reads as under: section 59. supplementary provisions as to amendment of application or specification.- (1) no amendment of an application for a patent or a complete specification or any document relating thereto shall be made except by way of disclaimer, correction or explanation, and no amendment thereof shall be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 2016 (HC)

The Government of Tamilnadu rep. by its Secretary to Government, Educa ...

Court : Chennai

(prayer: writ appeal filed under clause 15 of the letter patents act against the order dated 16.04.2010 in w.p.no.33784 of 2006.) huluvadi g. ramesh, j. the state has filed this appeal as against the order passed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 1969 (HC)

The Union of India (Uoi) Represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Com ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1970)1MLJ19

..... would thus appeal to be equitable that there should be a discrimination between individual private subscribers and firms, commercial concerns and corporation that would be a reasonable discrimination, which is patently equitable. the individual subscriber could be charged at lower rates, and the corporations of firms at higher tariffs. this seems to have been contemplated at one stage.49. in ..... (f), and the test is not that the person advancing this right should hold the entire proprietary interest. incorporeal rights can well be forms of property, including decrees of courts, patents, copyrights and even choses in action.39. it is in this context, and with this background of the development of the law, that we have to view the question, whether ..... in salmond on jurisprudence (12th edition), the broad division is 'corporeal' and ''incorporeal', corporeal property comprising land, chattels, and incorporeal property having two broad division, namely, jura in re propria (patents, copyrights, trade marks) and jura in re aliena (or encumbrances), namely, leases, mortgages and servitudes. the development of the case-law in the supreme court, on this aspect, is highly ..... an expression like ' as if enacted in this act ', which is not to be found in the case before us. that expression was examined, at some length, in institute of patent agents v. lockwood (1884) a.c. 347. but it is unnecessary for our present purpose to proceed, into the ramifications of the law here. certainly, such a clause is .....

Tag this Judgment!


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