Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Page 96 of about 5,310 results (0.040 seconds)

Aug 05 2013 (HC)

K.Rajendran Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Court : Chennai

..... has converted the residential building into that of commercial complex and running a food centre without obtaining chennai corporation's license, do not suffer from impropriety or material irregularity or patent illegality. per contra, the same is lawful and valid in law. resultantly, the writ petition fails. 52.in the result, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 2014 (HC)

V.Raghupathy Vs. Commissioner of Chennai Corporation

Court : Chennai

..... : 12.at this stage, a perusal of the contents of the inquiry officer report dated 09.11.2006 of the enquiry in respect of the petitioners clearly indicate latently and patently that the inquiry officer came to the resultant conclusion that the charges levelled against the petitioners were not proved. however, the inquiry officer's report was not accepted and further .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 13 2016 (HC)

R. Gowrishankar Vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals)-I, Chenn ...

Court : Chennai

(prayer: writ appeal filed under clause 15 of letters patent, against the order dated 22.02.2016 in w.p.no.5194 of 2016.) s. manikumar, j. 1. challenge in this appeal is to an order, made in w.p. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2015 (HC)

S.Balakrishna Pradeep Vs. 1)tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment ...

Court : Chennai

..... 002. 2)the director general of police, mylapore, chennai-600 004. 3)the superintendent of police, thoothukudi district, thoothukudi..respondents in both appeals appeals filed under clause 15 of letters patent, against the order made in w.p(md)nos.13148 and 13149 of 2012 dated 23.09.2014. !for appellant (in both appeals) : mr.g.thalaimutharasu ^for respondents (in both .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 16 2015 (HC)

1)the District Elementary Educational officer, Vs. S.Ayyavoo

Court : Chennai

..... . 5)the principal secretary to government, school education department, government of tamil nadu, fort st. george, chennai-9. ... appellants vs. s.ayyavoo ... respondent appeal filed under clause 15 of letters patent, against the order dated 19.09.2014 in w.p(md)no.915 of 2013. !for appellants : mr.v.r.shanmuganathan, special government pleader ^for respondent : mr.a.mohan for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 2015 (HC)

G.Balasundaram Vs. 1)the Secretary,

Court : Chennai

..... . 2)the inspector general of registration, santhome high road, chennai-28..respondents in w.a.836/11 & appellants in w.a.727/15 appeals filed under clause 15 of letters patent, against the order dated 26.07.2011 made in w.p.no.9703 of 2006. !for appellant in w.a.836/11 & respondent in w.a.727/15 : mr.g .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1929 (PC)

Guruswami Pillai and anr. Vs. Virabhadra Tavulkaran and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1929Mad497; (1929)57MLJ22

..... before to a bench of three judges is not taken away and continues to exist, but the effect of the amended clause (36) of the letters patent is not to deprive the right of appeal but to change the procedure as to what two judges should do when they find that they are about ..... .j. 150. accordingly it has been contended by the learned advocate for the respondents in this case that the amendment of clause (36) of the letters patent does not operate retrospectively and the opinion of the senior judge should prevail. the fallacy of this argument is obvious. the effect of the cases cited above ..... full bench in this case is, does clause (36) of letters patent as amended apply to an appeal which was pending at the time the amendment came into force?2. it was held in colonial sugar refining co. v. ..... this is all that the appellant wants here.6. we are therefore of opinion that the amended clause (36) of the letters patent applies to all pending cases. we answer the question referred to us accordingly.kumaraswami sastri, j.7. i agree.reilly, j.8. i agree. ..... held that where two judges differ in a chartered high court it is clause (36) of the letters patent that applies and not section 98 of the civil procedure code. now, clause (36) of the letters patent has been recently amended. the question naturally arises whether the amendment is retrospective. accordingly the question referred to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 1927 (PC)

In Re: Kencharla Krishna Rao

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1928)55MLJ171

..... of madras. i must therefore hold that the insolvency court has jurisdiction under section 7 of the act and that clause 12 of the letters patent does not affect the provisions of clause 18. the case must, therefore, be remitted to the insolvency judge with a direction that he should ..... it does not follow that clause 12 which deals with ordinary original civil jurisdiction must govern the case. it is clause 11 of the letters patent that gives ordinary original civil jurisdiction to the high court and that prescribes that it shall be exercised 'within such local limits as may from ..... rules relating to the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the high court and that, as such jurisdiction is limited by clause 12 of the letters patent, the same limitations must apply to insolvency matters. section 7 of the insolvency act is identical with section 105 of the english bankruptcy act of ..... relating o immoveable property situated outside the limits of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction. the learned judges also held that clause 12 of the letters patent does not control the provisions of clause 18 so as to limit the insolvency jurisdiction of the court. the reference does not in terms question ..... act confers jurisdiction on the high court in garnishee proceedings where the garnishee lives outside its jurisdiction, and (2) whether clause 18 of the letters patent is governed by clause 12 of the same. both these questions were decided by a bench of this court in abdul khader v. official assignee .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 14 1949 (PC)

Vemuri Parandhamiah Vs. R. Narasimha Rao and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1949)2MLJ147

..... into the conduct of the director and liquidator under section 235 of the companies act is a 'judgment' within the meaning of clause 15 of the letters patent. having regard to the exposition of the meaning of the word judgment contained in the decision of this court in tuljaram v. alagappa chettiar (1910) 21 ..... on appeal ability contained in clause 15 of the letters patent or it does not. there is no tertium quid. if the view of the calcutta high court in madan gopal daga v. sachindra nath sen i. ..... deprived the appellant of a substantial and important right, though it might not come strictly within the definition of 'judgment' in clause 15 of the letters patent was yet appealable. i am unable to reconcile the different parts of the judgment in this case. either section 202 of the companies act incorporates the limitation ..... courts were concerned, an order made in the winding up of a company, in order to be appealable, must be a 'judgment' within clause 15 of the letters patent. though this view was generally affirmed, by rankin, c.j., in levy bros. & knowles, ltd. v. subodh kumar day (1927) 31 c.w.n. ..... court made for the winding up of a company unless the order appealed from is a 'judgment' within the meaning of clause 15 of the letters patent. the contention of the learned advocate for the appellant on the other hand is that there is a right of appeal against all orders which decide .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 03 1991 (HC)

Vidya Charan Shukla Vs. Tamil Nadu Olympic Association and Another

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1991Mad323; 1991CriLJ2722

..... had been declared by a final judgment, to which the alleged contemnors were not parties, to be entitled to possession and to quiet enjoyment of his patent rights to hold a market in the fair green. the alleged contemnors had held a rival market in the fair green with knowledge of that decision ..... jurisdiction, powers and authority as they had at the commencement of that act, and section 113 empowered the establishment of new high courts by letters patent with authority to vest in them the same jurisdiction, powers and authority 'as are vested in or may be conferred on any high court existing ..... abolished, the high courts act of 1861 continued those powers to the chartered high courts by sections 9 and 11 and clause 2 of he letters patent of the year 1865 continued them as courts of record. despite this, in 1883 the privy council did not trace this particular jurisdiction of the ..... contempt apeal into a letters patent appeal. the issue as to the maintainability of the contempt appeal has already been concluded by an order of this court dated 14-8-1990. ..... court, in the interest of justice, be pleased to order conversion of this contempt appeal as an appeal filed under cl. 15 of the letters patent act in the interest of justice.' after hearing learned counsel for the parties, the first division bench allowed the prayer and permitted the conversion of the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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