Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: kerala Year: 2004 Page 1 of about 29 results (0.013 seconds)

Jan 20 2004 (HC)

Pakran Vs. Kunhiraman Nambiar

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-20-2004

Reported in : 2004(1)KLT824

..... by the rent control court are absolutely wrong. we feel that the formulation of a non-issue as the first issue, the serious consideration given to that issue and the patently wrong finding ultimately entered on that issue clearly demonstrates a basically faulty approach from the side of the rent control court, an approach which has also tainted the other findings .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 2004 (HC)

Karthiayani Vs. Anandan

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Mar-08-2004

Reported in : 2004(2)KLT575

..... the tenant at the time of his death. when section 15, which prohibits sub-letting, assignment or transfer, is read in juxtaposition with section 5 (11)(c)(i) it is patently clear that the legislature intends that in case no member of the family as referred to in the first part of the clause is there the 'heir', who under the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 08 2004 (HC)

Reeja Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jun-08-2004

Reported in : 2004(3)KLT599

..... to the absolute absence of any regulatory mechanism for these lotteries and the complete failure of the 1998 act. one thing is certain; the officers concerned of the states are patently liable under the penal provision of section 7 of the has just to visit one of the ubiquitous crowded lottery booths in mumbai and pune to be instantly .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 2004 (HC)

Sudhakaran Vs. University of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Oct-29-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)KLT133

..... the duly constituted selection committee which has the expertise on the subject. the decision of the selection committee can be interfered with only on limited grounds, such as illegality or patent material irregularity in the constitution of the committee or its procedure vitiating the selection, or proved mala fides affecting the selection etc. i have already found that in the present .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 2004 (HC)

Anantharajan Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Mar-11-2004

Reported in : 2004(2)KLT119

..... ) of the kerala land reforms act, 1964 and held as follows:'while making a reference to the tribunal mandatory the legislature cannot be said to have intended that even a patently frivolous, mala fide and illegal plea of tenancy taken by a party merely to delay the proceeding and to remain in possession of the property is also to be referred .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 2004 (HC)

Thomas and Anr. Vs. Subordinate Judge's Court and Ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Feb-27-2004

Reported in : AIR2004Ker338

..... has not decided immediately. for its determination, the examination of the first petitioner has been abruptly stopped so as to constitute the document as a bond. the court below has patently erred in appreciating the essential ingredient of the bond that it is an obligation to pay the amount which is created originally by the instrument itself and not at all ..... below has rightly found that the document is a bond which is not sufficiently stamped and the petitioners are liable to pay deficit stamp duty. there is no illegality or patent error in the impugned order and hence not liable to be quashed. hence this original petition, is dismissed.

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 07 2004 (HC)

Sebastian Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-07-2004

Reported in : 2004(2)KLT1150

..... that pertinent aspects had entered the mind of the government or the relevancy of those aspects considered in the proper perspective.20. counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is patently erroneous to say that an order passed by the competent criminal court compounding the offence under section 320(8) of cr.p.c. cannot be considered as an order having .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 15 2004 (HC)

State of Kerala Vs. Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jun-15-2004

Reported in : 2004(3)KLT85; [2006]144STC442(Ker)

..... did not place firm orders for the plant and machinery. the reason given by the department for rejecting the application of the company for the grant of eligibility certificate is patently erroneous and cannot therefore be sustained. in this view of the matter, the learned single judge was right in allowing the writ petition, setting aside the order dated 8.6 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 2004 (HC)

All India Lawyers Union Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Aug-19-2004

Reported in : 2005(1)KLT629

..... by writ of certiorari. if it is reasonably possible to form two opinion on the same material, the finding arrived at one way or the other cannot be called a patent error. jurisdiction is not available to be exercised for indulging into reappreciation or evaluation of evidence or correcting the errors like a court of appeal. from the evidence available before .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 2004 (HC)

Principal, Government H.S.S. Vs. Sakeer

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-23-2004

Reported in : AIR2004Ker176; 2004(1)KLT647

..... whether the single judge while dismissing the writ petition had refused to interfere only under article 227 and consequently no appeal was tenable against it under clause 15 of letters patent. supreme court expressed the view that the judgment disposing the writ petition as above did not give clear indication as to whether the issues were answered within the ambit of .....

Tag this Judgment!

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