Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Year: 1952 Page 1 of about 27 results (0.030 seconds)

Nov 07 1952 (HC)

Sm. K. Ponnalagu Ammal Vs. the State of Madras, Represented by the Sec ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-07-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad485; (1953)IMLJ410

..... --(1864) 10 hlc 704 (f)'. the provisions as regards appeal in england are not materially different from those contained in the civil procedure code or letters patent. in neither of them is there any express mention of persons who could appeal. in our opinion the practice consistently followed by the english courts ..... may not be strictly a decree within the meaning of the civil procedure code. mr. kesava aiyangar's anxiety to equate judgment in clause 15, letters patent with 'decree' in the civil procedure code was to have the benefit of rulings in which it was held that only parties to a suit could appeal ..... b) and subsequent decisions following it that certain decisions of judge on the original side of the high court are subject to appeal under clause 15, letters patent though similar decisions would not be appealable under the civil procedure code. we are not now concerned with the correctness of this view. sulaiman j. in -- ' ..... which occurs in the opinion of sir john edge in--'s.j. bhogilal v. dakore temple committee . 'the term 'judgment' in the letters patent of the high court means in civil cases a decree and not a judgment in the ordinary sense.'in the code of civil procedure we find three ..... that ponnalagu ammani was vitally interested in the subject matter and felt aggrieved by the order passed by subba rao j. and we admitted the letters patent appeal. the order granting leave was, however, passed 'ex parte'.9. a preliminary objection was taken by mr. kesava aiyangar on behalf of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 29 1952 (HC)

R.P. O'Connor vs. P.G. Sampath Kumar

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-29-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad897; (1953)IIMLJ272

..... have been an impression that as a court of record this court should keep on its file all the proceedings before it. but there is nothing either in the letters patent or in any statute which makes it incumbent on this court on its original side to retain on its file even plaints which ought not to have been properly presented ..... to the practice.7. the other ground pressed upon by mr, narasimhachari is based on the fact that this court is a court of record. clause 1 of the letters patent says so, and article 215 of the constitution .runs as follows:"every high court shall be a court of record and shall have alt the powers of such a court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 29 1952 (HC)

A.N. Rangaswami and anr. Vs. the Industrial Tribunal, Fort St. George, ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-29-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad447; (1953)IILLJ24Mad; (1953)IMLJ315

..... high court or supreme court cannot laydown rules for the admission of advocates whoalone will be permitted to represent the suitorsbefore them. on the other hand the clauses inthe letters patent granted to the chartered high courts to which reference was made earlier in this judgment clearly confer on the high courts the power to virtually prevent even qualified persons other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 17 1952 (HC)

The State Vs. Ex Major P.K. Swamy and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-17-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad451; (1953)IMLJ45

..... is not competent.12. further, there is no provision of law under which a case pending before the high court sessions can be transferred to any other court. the letters patent and the criminal procedure code provide for the transfer of cases to the high court from other courts; and there is no provision for transfer of a case pending before it to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 1952 (HC)

V. Krishnamurthy and anr. Vs. the Ceded District Auto Transport Co. Lt ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-08-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad321; (1953)IMLJ81

..... traffic board had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the order of the regional transport authority dated 31st august 1950. the decision appealed against is correct, and this letters patent appeal must therefore be dismissedwith costs. advocates fee rs. 100/- one set. ..... satyanarayana rao, j. 1. this letters patent appeal is against the judgment of our learned brother, subba rao j. setting aside the order of the government and that of the central road traffic board and allowing writ .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 1952 (HC)

Vennamuddala Venkata Challamma Alias Venkata Lakshmamma Vs. Cheekati A ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-07-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad571; 1953(I)MPLJ358

..... present case, there is neither text nor decision to support the "claim of the first respondent. nor is there proof of custom. his claim must therefore fail.14. the letters patent appeal is allowed and the decree of the lower appellate court is restored with costs here and before panchapagesa sastri j. ..... 1. in this appeal filed under the letters patent against the judgment of panchapagesa sastri j. in s. a. no. 1501 of 1947, the question relates to the succession to the properties of a dancing girl.2. one pullamma .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 1952 (HC)

Kanakammal Vs. Muhammad Kathija Beevi

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-29-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad188; (1952)1MLJ53

..... one which comes under section 47, civil p. c. and therefore the principle of res judicata in execution cannot apply to the facts of the present case.7. this letters patent appeal is, therefore, dismissed with costs.

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 1952 (HC)

Velu Pillai Alias Veluswami Pillai Vs. G.V. Sundararajulu Naidu and or ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-11-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad205

rajamannar, c.j.1. we agree with the learned judge panchapakesa aiyar j. against whose judgment this letters patent appeal has been filed that the execution petition filed by the respondent is not barred by limitation. the decree in question was passed on 2-11-1933. it is a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 08 1952 (HC)

Gada Venkata Subbayya Vs. Koyallamudi Venkanna

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-08-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad213; (1952)IIMLJ498

1. this is an appeal under the letters patent against the judgment of panchapakesa aiyar j. in a civ. misc. second appeal arising on the following facts. the respondent obtained a decree in o. s. no. 243 of 1933 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 17 1952 (HC)

N. Gopalan Vs. the State of Madras by the Collector of Tanjore

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-17-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad260; (1953)IMLJ29

rajamannar, c.j.1. in this appeal under the letters patent against the decision of subba rao j. dismissing the appellant's application for a writ of certiorari, the only ground taken is the invalidity of madras estates land (reduction of .....

Tag this Judgment!


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