Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: kerala Year: 2002 Page 1 of about 14 results (0.038 seconds)

Feb 15 2002 (HC)

Escotal Mobile Communications Ltd. Vs. Union of India

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Feb-15-2002

Reported in : [2002]123TAXMAN134(Ker)

..... to transfer or succession, and to their capacity of being injured. property includes not only ownership, estates, and interests in corporeal things, but also rights such as trade marks, copyrights, patents, and rights in persona capable of transfer or transmission, such as debts.' (page 117)the supreme court reiterated its own view in the decision in h. anraj v. government of ..... the contention, in view of the decision in vikas sales corpns case (supra). even the learned counsel was not able to contend that sale of a copy right or a patent right, though sale of intangible property would not attract sales tax.38. mr. menon then contended that activation charges were separately billed and there was no consideration for activation charges .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2002 (HC)

Escotal Mobile Communications Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Feb-15-2002

Reported in : [2002]126STC475(Ker); 2006[2]STR567

..... to transfer or succession, and to their capacity of being injured. property includes not only ownership, estates, and interests in corporeal things, but also rights such as trade marks, copyrights, patents, and rights in personam capable of transfer or transmission, such as debts.'the supreme court reiterated its own view in the decision in h. anraj.v. government of tamil nadu ..... contention, in view of the decision in vikas sales corporation : 1997(57)ecc1 . even the learned counsel was not able to contend that sale of a copy right or a patent right, though sale of intangible property would not attract sales tax.38. mr. menon then contended that activation charges were separately billed and there was no consideration for activation charges .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 2002 (HC)

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-02-2002

Reported in : AIR2002Ker357

..... 350 and cecure which are vitamin e and vitamin c and/or multi-vitamin tablets would fall within the definition of 'drugs'. the provisions of schedule v prescribing standards for patent or proprietory medicines also support the said stand. clause 2 thereof says that proprietory medicines containing vitamins for prophylactic, therapeutic or paediatric use shall contain vitamins in quantities not less ..... marketed for certain disease conditions in human beings and hence these are nothing but drugs. the statement also refers to schedule v of the act which depicts the standards of patent and proprietary medicines which clearly defines the therapeutic, prophylactic and paediatric doses of the vitamins in particular. it is also stated that these vitamins cannot be taken as food without .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 10 2002 (HC)

Usman Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Sep-10-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)KLT2

..... the party in sufferance is a respondent to the lis or proceedings cannot confer any further sanctity or authority and validity which it is shown and found to obviously and patently lack.'10. in the light of the above stated principles, as against ext. p6 the petitioner has got an effective remedy of collaterally attacking its validity as a defence in ..... new, and unstable, technical distinction between 'substantive' and 'procedural' invalidity ......... i can think of no rational ground for holding that a magistrate's court has jurisdiction to rule on the patent or substantive invalidity of subordinate legislation or an administrative act under it, but has no jurisdiction to rule on its latent or procedural invalidity, unless a statutory provision has that ..... of law within jurisdiction, that there was a single category of errors of law, all of which rendered a decision ultra vires. no distinction is to be drawn between a patent (or substantive) error of law or a latent (orprocedural) error of law. an ultra vires act or subordinate legislation is unlawful simpliciter and, if the presumption in favour of its .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 28 2002 (HC)

Aboobacker Babu Haji Vs. Pathummakutty Umma

Court : Kerala

Decided on : May-28-2002

Reported in : AIR2002Ker313

..... as to override either the provisions of the c.p. code or the letters patent. similarly it was held in dr. krishna singh v. bachan singh, air 1942 lah. 201, thus: 'it is essential for the validity of every rule framed by high court to ..... court to frame rules is the power the high court to do all things that may be necessary to do, in order to carry out the provisions of the letters patent and the c.p. code. that being the case and it being only a subordinate body in the matter of framing rules, it has no power to frame rules so .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 2002 (HC)

Denny Fernandez Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-20-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)KLT280

..... before proceeding to attach such property the collector or the authorised officer should give the defaulter an opportunity of being heard and record his reasons therefor in writing, it is patently opposed to the provisions of law and therefore, the same cannot be followed as a binding law. even though the entire section 44 including the proviso to sub-section (3 .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2002 (HC)

Kerala Public Service Commission Vs. Ashokan

Court : Kerala

Decided on : May-29-2002

Reported in : 2003(2)KLT177

..... the public service commission should be left to be discharged by the commission and no other authority including the court cannot usurp those functions and responsibilities. if there is any patent mistake or error which calls for correction, the court may direct the public service commission to reconsider the matter. the action of the court in directing the security officer to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 2002 (HC)

Suo Motu Reference in the Matter of Divorce Act

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-01-2002

Reported in : II(2002)DMC753

..... the indian divorce act, 1869, the high courts in india exercised jurisdiction in matrimonial matters under the enabling provisions of the high courts act and the provisions of the letters patent establishing the high court. under the act, jurisdiction was concurrently conferred on the highcourt as well as the district court in matrimonial matters. the act also contained certain provisions which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 2002 (HC)

Chacko Samuel Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-20-2002

Reported in : [2003(97)FLR666]; (2003)IILLJ689Ker

..... to the exigencies pf the situation by the competent authority. an employee has to serve at the place where he is posted. the writ court can interfere only when a patent case of mala fides is made out. in the present case, there is not even an iota of evidence which may cast any doubt about the bona fides of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 2002 (HC)

P.R.S. Hospital Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-20-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)KLT633

c.n. ramachandran nair, j.1. the short question arising in these cases is whether a hospital is a 'dealer' within the definition of that term contained in the k.g.s.t. act, hereinafter called the 'act'. the proceedings initiated against the petitioners by the sales tax authorities under the act under challenge are issued on the basis that the petitioners are 'dealers' under the act. while in some cases notices are issued to the hospitals directing them to take registration under the k.g.s.t. act, in some cases hospitals are directed to produce books of accounts and in yet another category penalty is levied or proposed either for not registering or for non-compliance with other statutory provisions. the validity or otherwise of all these proceedings will depend on whether the concerned hospital can be treated as a 'dealer' to subject it to all the disciplines provided under the act and rules. there is a standard pattern of service rendered in a hospital and distinguishing factors among the hospitals may be in regard to quality and volume of it, but essentially the activities in all the hospitals are one and the same. there is no case by any of the petitioner-hospitals that they are not supplying or selling medicines to the patients in the course of medical treatment which is the very basis on which sales tax authorities have issued notices calling them to take registration, to produce books of accounts, file returns and pay tax, if any due. therefore, the essence of issue is .....

Tag this Judgment!


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