Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Year: 1951 Page 1 of about 24 results (0.023 seconds)

Dec 13 1951 (HC)

Sri Lakshmindra theertha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt and anr. Vs. the C ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-13-1951

Reported in : AIR1952Mad613; (1952)IMLJ557

..... deprive its owner of it or its possession except by the duo process of law.'property includes not only real estate and personal property, but also incorporeal rights such as patents, copyrights, leases, accounts and choses in action, and every other thing of an. exchangeable value which one may have.'32. it is not disputed on behalf of the respondent that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 23 1951 (HC)

Peddadu Ramamurthi Vs. Cherukuvada Venkatasubba Rao and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-23-1951

Reported in : AIR1952Mad49; (1951)IIMLJ558

..... sitting as one of the vacation judges had power to admit a letters patent appeal against the judgment of another judge. he therefore directed notice to the government pleader and to the respondents presumably on this preliminary point.3. rule 4 ..... judgment of the court below was erroneous or unjust so as to justify the grant of leave to file an appeal 'in forma pauperis.'2. the letters patent appeal came on for admission during the vacation before panchapakesa aiyar, j., on 30th may 1950. the learned judge apparently felt a doubt whether a single judge ..... it stands, is erroneous and unjust 'prima facie.' the application to prefer the appeal is 'in forma pauperis' was therefore rightly dismissed.5. this letters patent appeal is dismissed. time for payment of court-fee till one week after the reopening of the high court after the mid-term holidays. ..... patent appeal, because law requires that a letters patent appeal must be disposed of by at least two judges.4. as notice has gone to the respondents we heard the appeal on the merits ..... acting as a vacation judge had therefore vested in him the appellate jurisdiction vested in the high court. he could therefore admit a letters patent appeal. if the learned judge was not inclined to admit the appeal, he could not by himself have disposed of the letters .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1951 (HC)

S.R. Muthusami Gounder Vs. T. Krishnaswamy Iyengar and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-09-1951

Reported in : AIR1952Mad533

..... such an amendment merety for the reason that it was a suit instituted after obtaining previous leave to sue under clause 12 of the letters patent. it does not also preclude the plaintiff from giving effect to such an order by carrying out the amendment or presenting an amended plaint, ..... 93; 'motilal v. shankar-lal', : air1939bom345 and other decisions, the learned judge observes as follows:'the wording and meaning of clause 12 of the letters patent, 1865, is clear, namely, that the court's leave shall previously be obtained before it has jurisdiction to receive a suit for which leave is required ..... try such different cause of action, except in another suit duly instituted, and furtherthat in suits for which leave to sue under clause 12 of the letters patent is necessary, the plaint cannot be afterwards' amended.8. this decision was referred to by kania, j. (as he then was) in 'motilal v. ..... any cause of action to which the plaintiff has become entitled, could only be adjudicated in a separate suit.5. clause 12 of the letters patent provides that 'the high court, in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction, shall be empowered to receive, try, and determine suits of every ..... that as amendment substantially alters the cause of action, the suit having been filed after obtaining previous leave of court under clause of the letters patent, no amendment could be allowed. the learned master, however, observed that he considered the question as to whether he should grant the plaintiff .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1951 (HC)

Govindarajulu Alias Jayaraman Vs. Balu Ammal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-30-1951

Reported in : AIR1952Mad1; (1951)2MLJ209

..... of ghose's hindu law (3rd edn.) restricts the illegitimate child's inheritance to the mothers property.'this decision was affirmed on appeal under the letters patent by a bench of this court consisting of leach c. j. and krishnaswami aiyangar j. the decision on appeal is reported in meenakshi ammal v. ..... parte throughout, and they did not move their little finger to have the decree modified. it is therefore difficult now at this stage of the letters patent appeal to invoke the power under order 41, rule 83 and modify the decree. the decree cannot therefore be modified.11. the memorandum of objections ..... of ramalinga mupan v. pavadai goundan, 25 mad 519 to the present case. the decision of the learned judge is therefore correct, and the letters patent appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.10. there is a memorandum of objections, which relates to the rights of defendants 1 and 2. the first ..... to represent his father, nataraja, and allowed the appeal of the plaintiff and dismissed the cross objections filed by defendant 4.2. in this letters patent appeal by defendant 4, the fourth defendant claimed that he was entitled to the entirety of the properties on the ground of representation. he claims this ..... on 28 1-1945 leaving behind him three daughters the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2. the fourth defendant who is the appellant in this letters patent appeal, it has now been definitely found, is the illegitimate son of nataraja by his permanently kept concubine. the suit was laid by one of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 1951 (HC)

Seshagiri Aiyar Vs. Valambal Ammal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-18-1951

Reported in : AIR1952Mad377

..... the learned subordinate judge which was allowed by panchapakesa aiyar j. the auction-purchaser who is the person affected by the decision of the learned judge has preferred this letters patent appeal with the leave of the court.8. the learned judge did not interfere with the concurrent findings of fact of the courts below and as no flaw enabling the ..... from reconsidering the question in his own independent way, and his finding therefore falls to be rejected.23. for the reasons indicated in the foregoing i agree that this letters patent appeal should be allowed with costs of the appellant throughout.satyanarayana rao andraghava rao, jj. 24. the connected l. p.appeal no. 106 of 1949 is dismissed. no costs ..... satyanarayana rao, j.1. this letters patent appeal is against the decision of panchapakesa aiyar j. in c. m. s. a. no. 17 of 1948.the matter arises out of execution proceedings in pursuance of the mortgage .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 1951 (HC)

The State of Madras Represented by the Secretary to Government, Develo ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-26-1951

Reported in : (1951)2MLJ619

1. these three appeals under the letters patent are against the judgment of krishnaswami naydu j. disposing of three applications for the issue of writs of 'mandamus' directing the state of madras to refer certain industrial disputes between .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 18 1951 (HC)

Kandaswami Mudali Vs. K.R. Narasimha Aiyar and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-18-1951

Reported in : AIR1952Mad582; (1951)IIMLJ623

..... order, confirmed by chandrasekhara aiyar j. has to be upheld, though not on the reasoning contained in the learned judge's judgment. we are, therefore, of opinion, that the letters patent appeal has to be dismissed, but in the circumstances without costs and do so.

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 1951 (HC)

S. Ananthakrishnan Vs. the State of Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-19-1951

Reported in : AIR1952Mad395; (1952)1MLJ208

..... court cannot lay down rules for the admission of advocates who alone will be permitted to represent the suitors before them. on the other hand, the clauses in the letters patent granted to the chartered high courts to which reference was made earlier on in this judgment clearly confer on the high courts the power to virtually prevent even qualified persons ..... advocate, vakeel or attorney on the roll of any high court (under the indian bar councils act, 1926) or in exercise of the powers conferred on such court by letters patent or by the legal practitioners act 1884 (a) in the case of an advocate or vakil--five hundred rupees (b) in the case of an attorney--two hundred and fifty ..... suitors, according as the said high court may by its rules and directions determine and subject to such rules and directions,"by another clause (clause 10 of the madras letters patent) it was provided that "no person whatsoever but such advocates, vakeels or attorneys shall be allowed to act or to plead for or on behalf of any suitor in the ..... of legal practitioners as advocates of the high court are as follows. so far as the chartered high courts are concerned, one of the clauses of the letters patent (clause 9 in the letters patent granted to this court) authorised and empowered the said high court "to approve, admit and enrol such and so many advocates, vakeels and attorneys, as to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1951 (HC)

K. Peramanayakam Pillai Vs. S.T. Sivaraman and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-22-1951

Reported in : AIR1952Mad419; (1952)IMLJ308

..... this court by chandrasekhara aiyar j. in second appeal no. 940 of 1945 or by tyagarajan j. in second appeal no. 2339/45 and 95/46 or in the letters patent appeal decided by horwill & balkrishna aiyar jj. against the latter decision in affirmance of the view of tyagarajan j. the view expressed by mulla in his commentary on the t ..... share had there been a partition then and there instead of years afterwards during which the rest of the family properties had become dissipated. this decision was reversed in letters patent appeal.79. it is true that in that case the conflict did not directly arise for determination as even assuming 'chinnu pillai v. kalimuthu chetty', 35 mad 47 and not ..... . 940 of 1945 and by tyagarajan j. in 'thimmu reddiar v. sennappa reddiar', s. a. no. 2339 of 1945 and 95 of 1946. the last decision was affirmed on letters patent appeal by horwill and balakrishna ayyar jj. in 'thimmu reddiar v. sennappa reddiar', l. p. a. nos. 2 and 3 of 1948. with great respect i am inclined to accept .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 16 1951 (HC)

Bysani Kamalamma Vs. Syed Ismail Ispahani E. Venkata Sastri

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-16-1951

Reported in : AIR1951Mad895; (1951)IMLJ676

..... rules & of the code. it becomes therefore necessary to examine the scope of the application of these two sets of provisions to the original side. clause 37 of the letters patent conferred power on this h. c. to make rules & orders from time to time 'for the purpose of regulating all proceedings in civil cases which may be brought before the ..... . section 129 specially provides for chartered h. cs. it runs thus:'notwithstanding anything in this code, any h. c. constituted by his majesty by letters patent may make such rules not inconsistent with the letters patent establishing it to regulate its own procedure in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction as it shall think fit, & nothing herein contained shall affect the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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