Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: chennai Year: 2015 Page 1 of about 139 results (0.052 seconds)

Feb 23 2015 (HC)

R.Chandrajini Vs. 1. the Agricultural Production Commissioner/

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-23-2015

..... & commercial commissioner, anna nagar, chennai - 40.3. the assistant director of agriculture (marketing), head post office road, palayamkottai, tirunelveli - 2. .. respondents/respondents writ appeal filed under section 15 of letters patents act against the order, dated 24.09.2012, made in w.p.(md)no.12443 of 2012. !for appellant :mr.m.kalyanasundaram senior counsel for m/s.vairam & william associates .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 2015 (HC)

V.Sethuraman Vs. 1.The State Rep.By

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-20-2015

..... the definition clause but shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the act. shall have the same meaning as the expression ?.proceedings?. occurring in section 77 of the patents act.?. (viii)in 2010 (2) supreme 651 [supreme paper mills ltd., vs. asst.commissioner, commercial taxes calcutta & ors.]. it is held that ?.interpretation of statutes - it is a well settled ..... commissioner, usilampatti panchayat union, usilampatti, madurai district. .. respondents/respondents 5.t.r.palpandi (r5 impleaded vide order dated 07.08.2014) .. respondent writ appeal filed under clause 15 of letters patent against the order dated 22.01.2014 passed in writ petition(md)no.11223 of 2013 by this court. !for appellant : mr.g.ethirajulu ^for rr ?. 1 to 4 : mr .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 2015 (HC)

J.Ramraj Vs. 1. the Management,

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-04-2015

..... , (madurai division - v) limited, virudhunagar. ... 1st respondent/petitioner 2. the labour court, madurai, rep. by the presiding officer. ... 2nd respondent/ 2nd respondent writ appeal filed under section 15 of letters patents act against the order dated 15.10.2012 made in w.p.(md)no.6077 of 2009. !for appellant : mr.ajmalkhan senior counsel for mr.g.kasinathadurai ^for 1st respondent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 2015 (HC)

The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai and Others Vs. ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-24-2015

(prayer: this writ appeal is preferred under clause 15 of letters patent against the order of this court dated 01.09.2014 passed in w.p.no.17121 of 2013.) dr. p. devadass, j. as only a narrow point is involved in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 2015 (HC)

I. Savarinathan Vs. The Asst. General Manager, Disciplinary Authority/ ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-03-2015

(prayer: appeal filed under clause 15 of letters patent against the order, dated 8.1.2014 made in w.p.no.21680 of 2010 on the file of this court.) dr. p. devadass, j. in view of the narrow .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 2015 (HC)

P. Sundarajan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Represented by Secretary to Gove ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-16-2015

(prayer: this writ appeal preferred under clause 15 of letters patent against the order dated 5.3.2013 made in w.p.no.12655 of 2011 on the file of this court.) dr. p. devadass, j. with the consent of both .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 15 2015 (HC)

The Correspondent/Principal Arokiamada Matriculation Higher Secondary ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-15-2015

(prayer:- writ appeal filed under clause 15 of the letters patent against the order dated 09.06.2009 in w.p. no. 604 of 2004.) pushpa sathyanarayana, j. the law without justice is like the grain bereft of its fibre. for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 2015 (HC)

The Management of Mettur Thermal Power Station Tamil Nadu Electricity ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-26-2015

(prayer: the appeal is filed under clause-15 of letters patent appeal against the orders dismissing the writ petition in wp.no.18646/2006 dated 23.04.2010.) dr. p. devadass, j. as only a short point is involved, we shall .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 05 2015 (HC)

The Managing Director, State Express Transport Corporation Tamil Nadu ...

Court : Chennai Madurai

Decided on : Nov-05-2015

(prayer: appeal filed under clause 15 of the letters patent, against the order, dated 17.04.2013 in w.p(md)no.13064 of 2009 passed by this court. v. ramasubramanian, j. the state express transport corporation tamil nadu limited .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 2015 (HC)

Ranganayaki Vs. The State

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-27-2015

..... illegal cannot also be countenanced for more than one reason. first of all, it has been an established judicial precedent that any illegality or patent illegality should go into the root of the matter and should not be trivial in nature. that apart, the award should be in contravention of ..... or harmful to the public good or public interest has varied from time to time. however, the award which is, on the face of it, patently in violation of statutory provisions cannot be said to be in public interest. such award/judgment/ decision is likely to adversely affect the administration of ..... the three grounds stated in renusagar, added another ground thereto for exercise of the court's jurisdiction in setting aside the award if it is patently arbitrary.62. such patent illegality, however, must go to the root of the matter. the public policy violation, indisputably, should be so unfair and unreasonable as ..... was dealing with unequal bargaining power of the workmen and the employer and came to the conclusion that any term of the agreement which is patently arbitrary and/ or otherwise arrived at because of the unequal bargaining power would not only be ultra vires article 14 of the constitution of india ..... set aside only if it is contrary to (a) fundamental policy of indian law; (b) interest of india; or (c) justice or morality, in addition to patent illegality. the supreme court has held as follows: "public policy 61. in renusagar power co. ltd. v. general electric co. (1994) suppl. 1 scc6441994 ( .....

Tag this Judgment!


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