Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Year: 1977 Page 1 of about 23 results (0.026 seconds)

Mar 14 1977 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. I.A.E.C. (Pumps) Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-14-1977

Reported in : [1977]110ITR353(Mad)

..... dealing with the payment of the amount in question expressly provides for the said payment for the know-how and use of the names and patents, etc., of aturia and for the manufacture of units commercially saleable and for general fulfilment of other conditions of the agreement. the provision ..... the same subject to the approval of the government of india; (3) during the currency of the agreement, aturia had undertaken not to surrender its patents without the consent of the assessee and to make available to the assessee any improvements, modifications and additions to designs; (4) aturia has, also ..... knowledge for the manufacture of any particular item for a specified duration then he had acquired only a licence to use the other party's patent and knowledge and the amount would constitute ' revenue expenditure '. it is against the background of this general position we have now to consider ..... be treated as revenue expenditure for the services rendered by the foreign collaborators such as grant of licence for the manufacture of submersible pumps, use of patent and trade marks and training of indian engineers, etc. and.the other 50% should be treated only as capital expenditure. against this order of ..... the assessee to manufacture and sell electric submersible pumps up to 12 hp; clause (ii) dealt with supply to the assessee with a copy of patents deposited in india and in force in various countries such as united states, germany and england ; clause (iii) provided that the assessee will have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 02 1977 (HC)

Shantilal Paramshankar Joshi, Sole Prop., Espee and Co. Vs. themis Dis ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-02-1977

Reported in : (1979)1MLJ213

..... and ask in the alternative for damages based on the profits which the infringers could have obtained by making a wrongfully use of the plaintiff's patent. the learned trial judge exercised his discretion and granted' this alternative prayer. we have had occasion to consider the import of such a request by ..... a time when there was no statutory provision is pressed into service by the learned counsel for the appellant. but for section 60 of the english patents act 1949, and even the general law as is applied and accepted in india, probably this argument is attractive. but, we cannot brush aside ..... and directing that on the plaintiff paying the court-fee due on that ascertained amount there would be a decree declaring the validity of the plaintiff's patent. the matter was again posted, after delivery of the judgment, for certain clarifications. once again the learned judge on 8th april, 1974, after ..... trial and after looking into the oral and documentary evidence, that the plaintiff was the true and first inventor of the product and that the patent claimed by the plaintiff was already known in india. on a comparison of the material objects placed before him viz., the one invented by the ..... by the defendants or loss suffered by the plaintiff by manufacturing and/or selling and/or using since the defendants commenced infringement thereof; during the patent period of such profits by the defendants or loss suffered by the plaintiff by ordering payment of such sums as the hon'ble court may .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 1977 (HC)

Nestle's Products (India) Ltd. Vs. P. Thankaraja and Anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-29-1977

Reported in : AIR1978Mad336; (1978)1MLJ417

..... view most often quoted in this connection is that of the house of lords in the celebrated 'solio case' the eastman photographic materials company limited v. the comptroller general of patents, designs, and trademarks, (1898) ac 571. i quote the following observations of lord shand and lord herschell as laying down the proper guideline and approach as under;--lord shand: 'i .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 1977 (HC)

Chikkaraj Vs. K.N. Viswanathan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-08-1977

Reported in : AIR1979Mad103

..... grant of an absolute estate in favour of veeraperumal ammal."the learned judges thus agreed with rajamannar j. as he then was, whose judgment they were considering in a letters patent appeal. the observations made in that decision have to be held to be applicable to the facts of the particular case and the nature of the gift deed which came ..... issues."14. a clause in a partition arrangement in tamil came up for interpretation before ramachandra iyer c. j. and venkatadri j. in ramaswami chetti v. venkatammal, , in a letters patent appeal which arose from the judgment of veeraswami j. as he then was, and when freely translated read thus (at p. 194) :-"we have agreed that the properties set out ..... deed that the appellants should take the properties absolutely on the death of kunne gounder is repugnant and void.20. the result is that the appellants succeed and these letters patent appeals are allowed with costs throughout. advocate's fee one set.21. appeals allowed. ..... 1. these letters patent appeal have been preferred against the judgment of n. s. ramaswami j. in a. a. o. 177 of 1975 and 183 of 1975 respectively.2. the appeals before the learned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 1977 (HC)

Jayaramachandra Iyer Vs. Thulasi Ammal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-26-1977

Reported in : AIR1978Mad95

..... his self-acquired property and not joint family property. the appeal by the plaintiff before this court having failed, he has come up before this court by way of letters patent appeal. 2. on behalf of the appellant counsel contended that there was clear evi-dence available in the case about the existence of sufficient nucleus for the acquisition of item .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 1977 (HC)

M.M. Jaffar Kermani Vs. M.M. Hassan Kirmani and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-17-1977

Reported in : AIR1978Mad121; (1978)1MLJ103

..... of the learned judge on the first two points, posed by him, it has not been canvassed before us. even otherwise, we are of the view that in a letters patent appeal such; a concurrent finding cannot be a subject-matter of issue.7. the last question, therefore, that looms large in this case is that in the absence of any ..... also found on merits that since 1967-68, the accounts have not been either audited or submitted to the wakf board.13. for all the reasons stated above, this letters patent appeal is dismissed, but there will be no order as to costs.

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1977 (HC)

indo French Pharmaceutical Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-20-1977

Reported in : 1978(2)ELT478(Mad)

..... indicate the manufacturer's name and this cannot be taken to indicate a connection between the medicine and its manufacture. if that is so, every medicinal preparation will automatically become patent or proprietary medicine as defined in the explanation in addition to the manufacturer's name some other symbol mark, monogram or label has been used by the manufacturer to indicate ..... its container a name or a symbol, monogram, label, signature or invented words or any writing to indicate a connection between the medicine and the manufacturer, it will become a patent or proprietary medicine. a close reading of the explanation, however, in my view indicates that the marks, symbols, monogram, label, signature or other words which are used in the medicinal ..... be levied under rule.173q of the central excise rules. in answer to the said show cause notice, the petitioner represented that the said three preparations are not proprietary or patent medicines as two of them were preparations under the indian pharmacopoeia and one of them was a preparation under the u.s. pharmacopoeia and therefore, they will not come under ..... having the right either as proprietor or otherwise, to use the name or mark.7. according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the three medicinal preparations will not become patent or proprietary medicines under the definition given in the explanation. according to the learned counsel for the respondent, however, explanation 1 gives an extended definition of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 1977 (HC)

Additional Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Southern Structural ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-05-1977

Reported in : [1977]110ITR890(Mad)

..... also for gettingtechnical assistance from the said company. the technical assistance tookthe shape of the british company giving the assessee-company all inventions and designs relating to railway wagons, whether patented or not,owned by the british company. it also required the british company togive full technical information in relation to the design and manufacture ofany existing type of railway wagon ..... , set it out here:' (a) metro hereby grant to southern (assessee) the right to use for the duration of this agreement all inventions and designs relating to railway wagons, whether patented or not, owned by metro. the rights covered by this agreement are not transferable without the prior consent of metro. (b) metro undertakes to supply southern at their request from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 1977 (HC)

Rajanarayanaperumal Temple, by Its Executive Officer Vs. Rethinam Pill ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-14-1977

Reported in : (1979)1MLJ159

..... civil court (till patta proceedings are over), there is no provision in the act and the bench which decided the letters patent appeal has not referred to any provision nor has it given any reason. hence the decision in the letters patent appeal, for postponing a decision by the civil court, regarding title, should be held to be confined to the facts .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 1977 (HC)

S. Gatikachala Mudaliar and ors. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu, by Its S ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-04-1977

Reported in : (1978)1MLJ109

..... me is that the action of the respondents in demanding security under a rule which runs counter to section 22 of the act be struck down on the ground of patent illegality which cannot be equated with an attempt to enforce a fundamental right even though the fields in which section 22 of the act and the fundamental right of trade ..... not think that there is any such case before us. it seems to me to be possible to distinguish the case on the ground that it was a case of patent voidness of the order passed so that the principle of legality, which is not suspended, could be affirmed even apart from enforcement of a specified fundamental right.3. bhagwati, j .....

Tag this Judgment!


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