Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Year: 1906 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.023 seconds)

Jul 18 1906 (PC)

Manavala Chetty (Accused) Vs. Emperor

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-18-1906

Reported in : (1906)ILR29Mad569

..... offence under the section. the argument that it had not been shown that pears had acquired a trademark, in the sense in which the word is used in the english patents, designs and trademarks acts, in the design which is printed on the box in which the soap was sold, is beside the point. under section 478 of the indian penal ..... more than three offences at one time could be regarded as an error, omission or irregularity within the meaning of section 637 but whether, under article 26 of the letters patent the court had power to adopt the course which was taken in that case.9. i am of opinion that the conviction in the present case was bad and must .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1906 (PC)

S. Srinivasamoorthy Otherwise Called Shamanna Vs. N.T. Venkata Varada ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-11-1906

Reported in : (1906)16MLJ238

..... governed the supreme court (to whose jurisdiction and powers, the high court succeeded) shows an intention on the part of the framers of the letters patent to limit rather than extend the jurisdiction and powers, is to my mind the very contrary of their intention. this is shown by the fact ..... subject of his majesty with reference to the question of jurisdiction. consequently, in deciding it with reference to the language of section 12 of the letters patent there is no scope for resorting as there might be, were the defendant a non-resident foreigner, to the rule of construction that in interpreting ..... to render a person subject to the jurisdiction.'16. as regards the meaning of the word 'dwell' as used in article 12 of the letters patent, moore, j., considered that the present case was governed by the decision of the bombay high court in goswami shri 108 shri girdharji v. maharaj ..... discussed. in the view which i take, it is not necessray for me to express an opinion whether apart from article 12 of the letters patent, this court has jurisdiction to entertain this suit under the jurisdiction which was conferred upon the abolished courts and which is now vested in the high ..... to add a few further observations. the question really resolves itself into what was the intention of the legislature in enacting article 12 of the letters patent. questions of international law and of the general principles of jurisprudence are only relevant in so far as they afford a guide for the construction .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 28 1906 (PC)

Subba Narayana Vathiyar and ors. Vs. K. Ramasami Aiyar

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-28-1906

Reported in : (1906)16MLJ508

1. this is an appeal under section 15 of the letters patent from an order of this court refusing to revise the appellate judgment of the district court in a suit on a promissory note. the suit being of a small cause .....

Tag this Judgment!


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