Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Year: 1964 Page 1 of about 29 results (0.024 seconds)

Jan 16 1964 (HC)

The Daily Calendar Supplying Bureau, Sivakasi Vs. the United Concern

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-16-1964

Reported in : AIR1967Mad381

..... a district court, a cross-reference had been made to the civil procedure code in the same manner as is found in the guardian and wards act or in the indian patents and designs act. however, we find in section 62(2) of the act, xiv of 1957, a cross-reference to the code of civil procedure, which ..... jurisdiction (hereinafter called a district court) and include the local limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of a high court."clauses 11 and 12 of the letters patent confers ordinary original civil jurisdiction to the high court, over the presidency town of madras, therefore, the area of the presidency town will be a district as ..... district court. the civil procedure code, to which reference is made in the definition clause in some of the other enactments like the guardians and wards act and the indian patents and designs act already referred to, in section 2(4) gives the definition of 'district' as meaning."the local limits of the jurisdiction of a principal civil ..... was significance in the deletion of the words high court in act xiv of 1957. he also referred to certain other enactments like the indian patents and designs act (act 11 of 1911) and guardian and wards act (act viii of 1890). in section 2(6) of the indian ..... patents and designs act, district court has been defined as having the meaning assigned to that expression by the code of civil procedure, 1908 section 4( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 01 1964 (HC)

V. Manioka thevar Vs. Star Plough Works, Melur

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-01-1964

Reported in : AIR1965Mad327; (1965)1MLJ406

..... of whether or not the invention involves any new inventive skill having regard to what was known or used prior to the date of the patent, courts will not grant an interim injunction restraining the defendant from pursuing his normal business activity. an interim injunction will not be granted if ..... in large number of star master ploughs 99.(5) principles regulating the grant of an interim injunction in a suit complaining of infringement of a patent are fairly well settled. the plaintiff must make out a strong prima facie case for the issue of a temporary injunction. an interim injunction will ..... he has been experimenting and inventing new patterns of ploughs as a result of his inventive genius and prolonged research and that he obtained a patent on 12-10-1960 in respect of a particular pattern of plough, having a special twist distinguishing his pattern from the other ploughs in the ..... respondent's conduct was an infringement of the plaintiff's patent. the plaintiff obtained an interim injunction in 1. a. 181 of 1964, but, on an application filed by the defendant-respondent in i. a ..... the appellant filed the suit, o. 8 no. 3 of 1964 on the file of the district judge, madurai, under s. 29 of the patents and designs act, against the respondent for a permanent injunction restraining the respondent form manufacturing and selling certain patterns of ploughs on he ground that he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 30 1964 (HC)

Velayudam Thankayyan Vs. Rev. G.W.T. Trowell

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-30-1964

Reported in : AIR1966Mad32

..... in paragraphs 9 and 10 of its judgment as to actual possession of the date of commencement of the litigation. on this finding alone, the letters patent appeal by this single private individual (james arthur edwards) will have to fail. it is accordingly dismissed.(13) l.p.a. 12 of 1963: as ..... pradesh decision cited, will be governed by the rules relating to appeals, which are a matter of internal organisation of the high court, by letters patent. those rules provide for a disposal of the appeal by a single judge, and a further appeal therefrom to a divisional bench of the same high ..... transferred to the andhra pradesh high court, and an argument of a very similar character was sought to be raised that there could be no letters patent appeal against the judgment of a single judge of the high court of andhra pradesh, disposing of a second appeal arising out of the area. subba ..... be the procedure which was in vogue in the travancore cochin high court. the travancore-cochin high court was not governed by any letters patent, similar to the letters patent that governs the organisation and procedure of the madras high court. there was only a single right of appeal to the high court, ..... restored the judgment and decree of the trial court, as far as the present action is concerned. hence, the first defendant has instituted this letters patent appeal.(6) there is a ground of preliminary nature raised by learned counsel for the respondents with regard to the maintainability of this appeal. it is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 21 1964 (HC)

S. Krishnamurthy Vs. Chief Engineer, Southern Railway, P.T. Madras and ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-21-1964

Reported in : AIR1967Mad315; [1966(12)FLR311]; (1966)IILLJ697Mad

..... trial; it might have been lacking in certain features of protection to the delinquent officer. but to argue from this that article 14 is thereby infringed would lead to the patent absurdity that, wherever it is possible to prosecute a government servant in a court of law, the authorities, would be precluded from proceeding against him departmentally, under any conceivable circumstances .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 01 1964 (HC)

T.M. Abdul Rahim and Co. Vs. Ahmed Basha

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-01-1964

Reported in : AIR1965Mad250

..... the plaintiff's trade mark. in the end, the learned judge dismissed the appeal preferred by the plaintiffs. now it is against this judgment the plaintiffs have preferred this letters patent appeal.(6) in the appeal once again the same arguments were addressed before us by the same counsel who appeared before ganapatia pillai j. the only point that was strenuously ..... (1) this letters patent appeal is preferred by the plaintiff's against the judgment of ganapatia pillai, j., confirming the dismissal their suit for an injunction restraining the defendant and his agents from selling .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 1964 (HC)

A.L. Parthasarathi Mudaliar Vs. Venkata Kondiah Chettiar

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-25-1964

Reported in : AIR1965Mad188

venkatadri, j.(1) this letters patent appeal is preferred by the first defendant against the judgment of ramakrishnan j. modifying the decree of the trial judge and directing the first defendant to execute a sale deed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 07 1964 (HC)

D.R. Mehta Vs. TIn Plate Dealers Association Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-07-1964

Reported in : AIR1965Mad400

venkatadri, j. (1) this is a letters patent appeal preferred by the plaintiff whose suit for recovery of advance and damages was dismissed by ramakrishnan j. the plaintiff's case is that he entered into a contract on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 1964 (HC)

Ramaswami Chettiar and anr. Vs. Venkatammal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-21-1964

Reported in : AIR1965Mad193

s. ramachandra iyer, c.j. (1) this is an appeal under cl. 15 letters patent against the judgment of veeraswami j. who set aside the judgment of the lower appellate court, which had reversed the decree for possession granted by the trial court in favour .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1964 (HC)

Manicka Gounder Vs. Arunachala Gounder and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-24-1964

Reported in : AIR1965Mad1

..... , however, of the conflict of decisions in this court, the learned judge, if we may say so with respect, very properly granted a certificate under cl. 15 of the letters patent to enable the aggrieved party to file this appeal.(4) it was settled law before the act that a woman married to a member of a joint family became a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 07 1964 (HC)

Ellappan Vs. T.R. Sitaramiah and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-07-1964

Reported in : AIR1965Mad180; (1965)1MLJ224

s. ramachandra iyer, c.j. (1) this appeal is filed under cl. 15 of the letters patent against the judgment of veeraswami j. it arises out of a suit for declaration of title to and recovery of possession of the suit properties by one raghupati iyer, whose .....

Tag this Judgment!


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