Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: kerala Page 1 of about 1,133 results (0.034 seconds)

Nov 08 2005 (HC)

Balan Vs. Sivagiri Sree Narayana Dharma Sanghom Trust

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR2006Ker58; 2006(4)CTC273; [2006(2)JCR94]; 2005(4)KLT865

..... to a division bench. the preliminary objection is overruled.'we are of the view that the same will apply in this case. unlike letters patent appeals, an order passed in exercise of original jurisdiction by a single judge is appealable under section 5(i) of the high court act. ..... following categories of judgment are excluded from the appealable judgments under the first limb of clause 10 of the letters patent:1) a judgment passed in exercise of appellate jurisdiction in respect of a decree or order made in exercise of appellate jurisdiction by a ..... apex court followed the judgment in shah babulal khimji v. jayaben d. kania : [1982]1scr187 and held that the word 'judgment' used in letters patent should receive a wider or more liberal interpretation than the word 'judgment' used in the code of civil procedure. the court held as follows:'10...the ..... bombay high court in anand issardas motiani and ors. v. virji raisi air 1984 bombay 39, while considering the maintainability of appeal under letters patent (bombay) act against order passed under section 24 cpc, held that even though only judgments are appealable and an order passed by the single ..... high court in jagatguru shri shankaracharya jyotish peethadhiswar shri swami swaroopanand saraswati v. ramji tripathi and ors. : air1979mp50 is also under clause 10 of letters patent (m.p.) act wherein appeal will lie only against 'judgment' which involves final determination of some right or liability of the parties. in all these .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 2009 (HC)

P.C. Thomas Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : (2010)231CTR(Ker)306

..... the reason that the deduction under section 80o of the act is admissible only in respect of income received from foreign enterprises in consideration of use outside india of any patent, invention, design, registered trade mark and the consideration here is not for any such use. the disallowance is confirmed in two level appeals and it is against the order of ..... appellant because in our view, the items covered under section 80-o of the act are generally items falling under the group 'intellectual property rights' which are patents, trade marks, designs etc. covered by the patents act, trade marks act, designs act etc. all what the appellant does is to convert the extensive educational materials in concise form for easy understanding by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 1972 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. E.C. Jacob

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1973]89ITR88(Ker)

..... that capital gains are assessable in the case of transfer of goodwill, the indian act did not have in contemplation, when enacting section 12b, that self-created assets like copyright, patents and goodwill should be subjected to capital gains arising on their transfer. it is enough to say that, complex and difficult as this question is, we are not satisfied that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 23 1981 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. CochIn Refineries Ltd.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1982]135ITR278(Ker)

..... capital nature, such expenditure should be incurred after the 28th day of february, 1966, and such expenditure should be incurred on the acquisition of patent rights or copyrights used for the purposes of the business. only when all these three conditions are satisfied any question of deduction under section 35a would ..... reads thus: '35a. (1) in respect of any expenditure of a capital nature incurred after the 28th day of february, 1966, on the acquisition of patent rights or copyrights (hereafter, in this section, referred to as rights) used for the purposes of the business, there shall, subject to and in accordance with ..... for that year as it was not entertained similarly for 1968-69. section 35a of the act provides for deduction towards expenditure on acquisition of patent rights or copyrights. in accordance with, that section only 1/14th was to be deducted in a year, the year to commence from the ..... the foreign company had to be paid a royalty of rs. 3,42,543 in dollars for using these patents. the liability for this payment accrued immediately on implementing the processing of the refinery, i.e., on september 16, 1966, the date, the refinery ..... oil products company, u.s.a., on november 26, 1963, and on december 30, 1963, respectively. according to these agreements, the assessee-company obtained patent rights from the universal oil products company to use the u.o.p. merox process and u.o.p. platforming process for refining oil in india. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 01 2013 (HC)

M/S. Vajra Plastic Industry Vs. Controller General of Patents

Court : Kerala

..... . by its managing partner m.m.paulose. by advs.sri.t.m.raman kartha smt.k.n.sreedevi sri.m.c.sreerenjith sri.arun basil respondents: ------------------------ 1. controller general of patents, trade marks and designs (registrar of trade marks appointed under s.3 of the trade marks act 1999), trade marks division intellectual property bhavan, antop hill post office s.m .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 1984 (HC)

C.R. Raman Vs. Karthikayan

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1984Ker208

..... exercise of the jurisdiction vested under article 227 of the constitution of indiaas well. it may also be acting 'in excess of jurisdiction'. per lord denning -- in baldwin & francis v. patents appeal tribunal, (1959) 2 ah er 433 at pp. 447, 448.7. i hereby annul or set aside the order passed by the principal munsiff, cochin dated 12-4-1984 ..... c. but the court will so act only if the court is prima facie, satisfied, that resistance or obstruction, has been offered by a person on a ground, which is patently without substance, or whose claim is on the face of it unacceptable and cannot be said to be in good faith. in that behalf, it is open to the court ..... into account a situation where resistance to possession is offeredor obstruction is made by the judgment-debtor or any other person bound by the decree on a ground which is patently without substance. it will include the case of a person who claims to be in possession in his own right and independently of the judgment-debtor but whose claim is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 2003 (HC)

Bechu and Company Vs. Asst. Commissioner (Assessment)

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 2003(2)KLT1009

..... not consider the question in the manner projected by him in the present case. if the classification between general dealers of manufactured goods and dealers of manufactured goods who had patent or trade mark is a reasonable classification which has a rational nexus or connection, the fact that a sub classification was reasonable but has not been made cannot be a ..... ascertain whether persons are similarly placed, one must look beyond the classification and to the purposes of law.'the court thereafter observed that classification of dealers who are holders of patents or trade marks and dealers who are not, for the purpose of levy of tax on the sale of purchased goods by them, appear to be a reasonable classification, having ..... possible and that such further classification is not made cannot be a ground for attack under article 14. in aryavaidaya pharmacy's case, it was noted that while all other patent or proprietory medicinal preparations belonging to the different systems of medicines were taxed at the rate of 7% only, without any classifications, based on per centage of alcoholic contents, arishtams ..... supreme court thereafter considered the decision in aryavaidaya pharmacy's case mentioned above and it was observed thus:'in that case, it is to be noted that while all other patent or proprietor y medicinal preparations belonging to different systems of medicines were taxed at 7 per cent only without any classification, arishtams and asavas prepared under the ayurvedic system alone .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 11 2012 (HC)

S. Prasannan Vs. the Controller General of Trademark and Others

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 2012(3)KLT351; 2012(3)KLJ600

..... of that claim shall be the date of the filing of the relevant specification, namely, the provisional specification. section 11b(1) of the act stipulates that no application for a patent shall be examined unless the applicant or any other interested person makes a request in the prescribed manner for such examination within the prescribed period. the period for making a ..... the petitioner and sri.p.parameswaran nair, learned assistant solicitor general of india appearing for the respondents. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the application for a patent accompanied by the provisional specification was submitted on 17.2.2005, that the deficiency in the fee was made good and the entire fee remitted by way of two demand ..... as having been withdrawn under section 11b(4) of the act. the petitioner thereupon submitted ext.p9 representation dated 20.3.2010 through his attorney to the controller general of patents, the first respondent herein, requesting him to take immediate action to rectify the status of the application and to notify the correct status of the application. the first respondent sent ..... for short) accompanied by a provisional specification relating to the method and manner of a device for mechanical automatic water level controller. the fee payable on an application for a patent accompanied by a provisional specification by a natural person at the relevant time was rs.1,000/-. the petitioner however paid only rs.750/- as fee by demand draft dated .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 1982 (HC)

Catalysts and Chemicals India (West Asia) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Inc ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : (1982)31CTR(Ker)274; [1982]137ITR110(Ker)

..... the case, the assessee has prayed for a distribution of the impugned amount of rs. 18.75 lakhs between the capital expenditure and expenditure on patent and trademarks. even apart from the assessee conceding so, the agreement itself is very plain on this.13. the tribunal categorically found in its order ..... it was mentioned that the assessee was praying for the distribution of the impugned amount of rs. 18'75 lakhs between capital expenditure and expenditure on patent and trade-mark. in ground no. 7 it was submitted that the expenditure should be allowed as a revenue deduction. the tribunal which did not ..... was in the shape of books. but the aac felt that what were acquired were not books, but a valuable right covering the right to patents, processes and trade-marks and, therefore, there was no provision for depreciation and development rebate in regard to the value of such acquisitions. the ..... tests, engineering drawings of all process schemes, etc.,(2) during the duration of the agreement the company was to be provided with the additional know-how patents, etc., and (3) qualified indian personnel was to be trained by cci by sending to india qualified cci personnel. the equivalent of the amount of ..... rupees for each u.s. dollar) as a down payment to cci for agreeing to provide to the company all its existing know-how, patents and processes and trade-mark rights in relation to the catalysts listed above with the exception of the catalystic reforming catalysts, with further payments to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2011 (HC)

A1 Shifa Super Speciality Hospital for Piles Vs. A1 Shifa Hospitals (P ...

Court : Kerala

..... actual turnover. the question is whether these are sufficient to sustain the complaint of passing off action. 45. here one may at once refer to a passage from intellectual property: patents, copyright, trade marks and allied rights, 6th edn. by w. cornish and d. llewelyn at page 630, which reads as follows: accordingly, the claimant will demonstrate the volume of his ..... others selling the same goods or copied goods. if the latter is possible at all it is only as a result of the application of the law of copyright, designs, patents or confidential information. furthermore, passing off does not create or protect a monopoly in a name or get-up. the latter point was made clearly over 100 years ago by .....

Tag this Judgment!


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