Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Year: 1940 Page 1 of about 30 results (0.025 seconds)

Dec 17 1940 (PC)

Venkateswara Sarma, Styled Gnanasivacharia Swamigal, Matathipathi and ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-17-1940

Reported in : (1941)1MLJ644

..... were used and what was the object appearing from those circumstances which the person using them had in view.39. in eastman photographic materials co. ltd. v. comptroller-general of patents, designs and trade marks (1898) a.c. 571 lord halsbury said:. to construe the statute now in question it is not only legitimate but highly convenient to refer both to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 02 1940 (PC)

N.K.R.M.N. Nagappa Chettiar and ors. Vs. Raja Srimanthu Muthu Vijaya R ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-02-1940

Reported in : AIR1940Mad532; (1940)1MLJ442

..... before wadsworth, j. he concurred with the decision of the learned district judge and dismissed the second appeal. leave was however given by the learned judge for preferring a letters patent appeal against his judgment and the appeal accordingly now comes before us.2. the notice in question is as follows:to,1 the district collector of ramnad and agent of ..... krishnaswami aiyangar, j.1. this is an appeal under the letters patent from the judgment of wadsworth, j., who confirmed on second appeal the decision of the district judge, ramnad, reversing the judgment of the subordinate judge of devakottah in o.s. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 16 1940 (PC)

Pachaiammal and anr. Vs. the Hindustan Co-operative Insurance Society ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-16-1940

Reported in : (1940)2MLJ688

..... decision in this appeal is whether the respondent company, the hindustan co-operative insurance society, limited, carries on business in madras within the meaning of clause 12 of the letters patent of this court. the first appellant is the widow and the second appellant is the daughter of one c.t. subramania mudali, who died on the 31st may, 1926. the ..... judge that the authorities are such that the court is bound to hold that the respondent company is not carrying on business in madras within the meaning of the letters patent. consequently the appeal must be dismissed with costs. the appellants could have sued in the subordinate court if they had so chosen and it is regrettable that that course was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 13 1940 (PC)

T.S. Rajan Vs. Mrs. Pankajammal and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-13-1940

Reported in : AIR1941Mad194; (1941)1MLJ186

..... refer in detail to the controversy, but it is manifest that here the question whether the present proceedings do constitute a suit for land within the meaning of the letters patent involves a substantial question of law.6. we consider that the appellant's contention that this matter should not be decided in a summary procedure should prevail. apart from the ..... the register of suits, but after the serial number the letter 'o.s.', shall be placed to distinguish it from plaints filed in ordinary-suits. clause 12 of the letters patent only gives the court jurisdiction in the case of suits 'for land' if the property is situated within the jurisdiction of the court. there has been much controversy in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 16 1940 (PC)

Pachaiammal and anr. Vs. Hindustan Co-operative Insurance Society, Ltd ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-16-1940

Reported in : AIR1941Mad270

..... which falls for decision in this appeal is whether the respondent company, the hindustan cooperative insurance society, ltd., carries on business in madras within the meaning of clause is, letters patent of this court. appellant 1 is the widow and appellant 2 is the daughter of one c.t. subramania mudali, who died on 31st may 1926. the deceased lived at ..... judge that the authorities are such that the court is bound to hold that the respondent company is not carrying on business in madras within the meaning of the letters patent. consequently the appeal must be dismissed with costs. the appellants could have sued in the subordinate court if they had so chosen and it is regrettable that that course was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 06 1940 (PC)

T.S. Pichu Ayyangar Vs. Sri Perarulala Ramanuja Jeer Swamigal, Dharmak ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-06-1940

Reported in : AIR1940Mad756; (1940)1MLJ882

..... by an interlocutory order and there would be no appeal either to this court or to the privy council. the order of venkataramana rao, j., was not appealable. the letters patent of this court expressly provide that an order passed in revision shall not be subject to an appeal and section 3 of the code of civil procedure says that no .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1940 (PC)

A.L.S.P.P.L. Subramanian Chettiar by Agent Narayanan Chettiar Vs. Muth ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-11-1940

Reported in : AIR1940Mad890; (1940)2MLJ170

..... to apply for a certificate or for the court to grant one.10. the order of wadsworth, j., was a final order of this court. clause 15 of the letters patent prohibits an appeal from an order passed by the court in the exercise of its revisional powers. the learned judge considered whether the matter involved a substantial question of law .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1940 (PC)

Velayudham Subbayya Nadar Vs. Kalamsetti Anjaneyalu and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-30-1940

Reported in : (1940)2MLJ570

..... mudaliar i.l.r.(1902)mad. 437, that an order rejecting an application for leave to appeal in forma pauperis is an appealable 'judgment' under clause 15 of the letters patent. see tuljaram rao v. alagappa chettiar (1910) 21 m.l.j. 1 : i.l.r. 35 mad. 1 .it is therefore difficult to see how such a-proceeding can be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 1940 (PC)

Varadarajam Pillai, Minor by Guardian Malayaperumal Pillai Vs. Krishna ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-21-1940

Reported in : AIR1941Mad321; (1940)2MLJ664

..... it is found as a fact that the promissory note was really taken benami for him. it seems to me impossible to accept any of these propositions.2. a letters patent appeal (no. 100 of 1938) was preferred against this decision and it was dismissed on the ground that the decree based on the promissory note could not be regarded as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 1940 (PC)

Gourochandra Dyano Sumanto Vs. Krishnacharana Padhi, Minor by Next Fri ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-11-1940

Reported in : (1941)1MLJ153

..... for the alterations, he was not prejudiced by them and therefore, was entitled to maintain the suit. the learned judge gave, however, a certificate under clause 15 of the letters patent, which has permitted this further appeal.2. it has not been suggested at any stage of the proceedings that the respondent or his guardian was responsible for the alterations in .....

Tag this Judgment!


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