Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Year: 1980 Page 3 of about 40 results (0.038 seconds)

Jun 19 1980 (HC)

India Tyre and Rubber Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-19-1980

Reported in : [1981]47STC273(Mad)

..... in these writ petitions. the writ petitions fail and are dismissed with costs. one set rs. 500 - advocate's fees. 29. [the petitioner appealed under clause 15 of the letters patent.] 30. k. k. venugopal for m. krishnappan, for the appellant. 31. k. s. bakthavatsalam for the additional government pleader, for respondents nos. 1 and 2.

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1980 (HC)

Ramesh and Company Vs. the Commissioner for Land Revenue and Commercia ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-17-1980

Reported in : [1981]48STC41(Mad)

..... limitation would not bar his powers, he had declined to interfere on the ground of laches on the part of the assessee in going before the tribunal. the order is patently erroneous and cannot be sustained, with the result, his order is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. the matter is remitted back to the commissioner for commercial taxes .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 1980 (HC)

Kanyaka Parameswari Devasthanam and Charities Vs. Srila Sri Ambalawana ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : May-06-1980

Reported in : AIR1981Mad42

..... nothing else.. ... the person for whose benefit. the wo is proposed to be acquired has no place in do exercise of the sovereign power by the state. this is the patent reason why the act has limited the scope of the lis in regard to acquisition between the owner of the land and the sovereign state".12. as regards the leave .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 12 1980 (HC)

Perumal and ors. Vs. Ramachandra Padayachi and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-12-1980

Reported in : (1982)1MLJ65

..... time. it would have been monstrous, if the law were understood to be different driving the auction-purchasers without a remedy in the world for delivery of possession. it is patent that if their applications were to be dismissed as time-barred they would have to resign themselves to a double jeopardy, while the judgment-debtor sits pretty on the property .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 05 1980 (HC)

R.S. Muthuswami Gounder Vs. A. Annamalai and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-05-1980

Reported in : AIR1981Mad220

..... court in associated cement companies ltd. v. l. s. ramakrishna gounder : air1965mad318 , referred to above, a decision of veeraswami, j-,as he then was, came up for consideration in letters patent appeal no. 12 of 1963. the learned single judge, while affirming the title of the appellant to 79 cents of land, held that in the circumstances it would be unjust .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 1980 (HC)

The Official Assignee Vs. Kochamma Amma and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-28-1980

Reported in : (1980)2MLJ455

..... . indeed if a different interpretation is given, it will render the entire object of the section nugatory, because the court would be powerless to set at naught transfers which are patently void merely because they had been made at a particular point of time.fazl ali, j. then referred to the full bench decision in anwar khan v. muhammad khan (1929 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 1980 (HC)

Gobi Pillai Vs. Dr. Swamy

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-04-1980

Reported in : (1980)1MLJ387

..... 178, vallam thangi pillaiyar koil street, tirunelveli town had been in exclusive possession of the defendant, and the allegation of threatened interference of the possession of the plaintiff is a patent falsehood. even in 1968, defendant had come over to tirunelveli and set up his clinic on 4th february, 1968 at south car street, tirunelvel town and he has been residing .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 1980 (HC)

Sri Kanyaka Parameswari Devasthanam and Charities by Its Secretary, N. ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : May-06-1980

Reported in : (1981)1MLJ42

..... noshing else.... the person for whose benefit the land is proposed to be acquired has no place in the exercise of the sovereign power by the state. this is the patent reason why the act has limited the scope of the lis in regard to acquisition between the owner of the land and the sovereign state. as regards the leave being .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1980 (HC)

Kuppuraj Vs. K. Arjunan and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-16-1980

Reported in : (1981)1MLJ222; 1993LW711

..... sole ground, namely, bar of limitation under article 67 of the schedule to the limitation act. it is the correctness of this conclusion that is challenged in the present letters patent appeal, with the leave of the learned judge.4. we are clearly of the opinion that the conclusion of the learned judge is erroneous. article 67 of the schedule to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 15 1980 (HC)

R. S. Muthuswami Gounder Vs. A. Annamalai and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-15-1980

Reported in : (1981)1MLJ258

..... in the associated cement companies limited v. l. s. ramakrishna gowder : air1965mad318 . referred to above, a decision of veeraswami, j., as he then was, came up for consideration in letters patent appeal no, 12 of 1963. the learned single judge, while affirming the title of the appellant to 79 cents of land, held that in the circumstances it would be unjust .....

Tag this Judgment!


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