Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: mumbai Year: 2005 Page 2 of about 154 results (0.008 seconds)

May 06 2005 (HC)

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Through Divisional Traffi ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : May-06-2005

Reported in : 2006(2)BomCR340; (2005)107BOMLR251; (2006)IILLJ283Bom; 2005(4)MhLj798

..... which have been granted by the learned single judge are rightly molded and no interference is necessary by us. in the result, we pass the following order.order(1) letters patent appeal nos. 203 of 2001, 204 of 2001, 205 of 2001, 206 of 2001 and 207 of 2001 are hereby dismissed.(2) the judgment and order dated 2nd august 2001 ..... s.b. mhase, j.1. these letters patent appeals are directed against the common judgment delivered by the learned single judge in writ petition nos. 3831 of 1995, 2441 of 1995, 2442 of 1995 and 5801 of 1999 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 2005 (HC)

Walchandnagar Industries Limited (Engineering and Foundary Division) V ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-20-2005

Reported in : 2005(6)BomCR733; (2005)107BOMLR942; (2006)IILLJ834Bom

..... said settlement is valid, just, proper and binding on all the employees including the present is specifically mentioned that the respondents in letters patent appeal no. 212 of 2002, being the members of the recognised union and since the recognised union has signed the said settlement, after having ..... to the extent of termination of his services. out of the members of the said recognised union, only 4 persons, namely, respondents in letters patent appeal no. 212 of 2002 have challenged the said settlement. thus, it will be noticed that all the employees, whether members or non-members of ..... v. bukhari has relied upon several cases, which will be dealt with in the later part of the judgment. he ultimately submitted that these letters patent appeals may be allowed.21. learned counsel shri. s.m.dharap, who appears for the respondent, submitted that though there is no pleading in respect ..... category of non-members of the recognised union. out of those 13 non members of the recognised union, only one employee the respondent in letters patent appeal no. 213 of 2002, namely, mr. mulani, has challenged the said settlement. it is further to be noted that out of 318 ..... preferred write petition no. 4734 of 1994 against the common order passed by the member, industrial court, referred to above, from which the present letter patent appeals arise. while disposing of the writ petition no. 4734 of 1994, the learned single judge of this court, after disposing of the writ petition .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2005 (HC)

National Textile Corporation (Sm) Ltd. Vs. Devraj Chandrabali Pai

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-19-2005

Reported in : 2006(1)ALLMR494; 2006(1)BomCR765

..... that those litigants who mention articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india in the cause title of their petition had a remedy of letters patent appeal and those who do not so mention loose the remedy. the necessary corollary being conferral of this right to choose the forum and remedy of ..... courts under the high court act, 1861. however in so far as the high court of judicature at bombay is concerned the charter of the letters patent of 1865 specifically conferred the power to issue writs in this court. but this power was territorially limited. this limitation seriously impaired supervisory jurisdiction which the ..... to be read in place of section 107 of the government of india act, 1919. so read no appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent is maintainable against an order made under article 227 of the constitution. it was in the light of this legal position that several judgments of the ..... industrial court was maintained. it is this order dated 18.8.2004 which is questioned in this appeal filed under clause 15 of the bombay letters patent appeal.5. at the outset the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant was asked to establish the maintainability of this appeal in view of ..... order passed by the learned single judge of this court on 18.8.2004 the appellant has preferred this appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent appeal of this high court of judicature at bombay. facts giving rise to this appeal stated briefly are as under:2. the national textile corporation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 2005 (HC)

DBH International Ltd., a Company Incorporated under the Companies Act ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-09-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)BomCR732; [2005(106)FLR375]; (2005)IIILLJ434Bom

..... deposited in this court in pursuance of the order dated 5.9.1996, as compensation to the workmen. the letters patent appeal is, accordingly, stands disposed of. 28. mr c.u. singh, learned counsel for the appellant, at this stage, submitted that the interim stay ..... paid to the workmen as compensation. 27. in the result, this letters patent appeal is partly allowed. the order of reinstatement is quashed and set aside. the appellant-management is directed to pay the amount, which they have ..... for the workmen. keeping the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties in view and considering that this court, while admitting the letters patent appeal, had directed the management to deposit the arrears of salary upto 31.12.1995 in this court, in our opinion, that amount should be ..... 30 days. we have already held that the application of divider of 30 days for computing the retrenchment compensation was not only wrong but it was patently illegal. we have also held that the excess payment made under other heads cannot be taken into account for making the shortfall good. thus, the ..... of 1996. the writ petition was, however, rejected summarily by the learned single judge vide order dated 1.7.1996, which is impugned in the present letters patent appeal. the order passed by the learned single judge (s.h. kapadia, j.) dated 1.7.1996 reads thus : 'in the present matter, retrenchment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 2005 (HC)

Empire Industries Ltd. (Garlick Engineering Division) a Company Incorp ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-01-2005

Reported in : 2005(5)BomCR308; (2005)IIILLJ313Bom

..... appellant submits that the interim order which was in force during the pendency of this letters patent appeal may be continued for a period of eight weeks. ms. nerissa britto holding for ms. gayatri singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 3 opposes for granting ..... the letters patent appeal is dismissed. no costs.11. after the judgment is declared, at this stage, shri sujit salkar holding for shri s.p. dhulapkar, learned counsel for the ..... ) and, therefore, the order passed under section 10(3) of the i.d. act cannot be faulted. we have, therefore, no hesitation in dismissing this letters patent appeal filed against the order of learned single judge upholding the order under section 10(3) by which the lock out declared and started by the employer was prohibited. ..... the factory of the appellant-company. respondent no. 3 claim to be a recognised union. the dispute between the two unions is not relevant for deciding this letters patent appeal, since the issue that was raised before the learned single judge whether reference under section 10(1) of the i.d. act made on the basis ..... d.b. bhosale, j.1. this letters patent appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 9.2.2001 rendered by the learned single judge, dismissing the writ petition no. 6051 of 1995 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 2005 (HC)

Mahindra and Mahindra Limited Vs. Sunil Yeshwant Pandit and Shri P.S. ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-30-2005

Reported in : 2006(1)ALLMR261; 2006(1)BomCR38; [2006(109)FLR47]; (2006)IILLJ363Bom

..... in its view taking back the 1st respondent will give a wrong signal in a case of dishonesty and will affect discipline. 26. in the circumstances, the letters patent appeal will have to be allowed and also the writ petition thereby dismissing the reference which the 1st respondent-workman had filed in the labour court. 27. we are ..... consent. the division bench, with a view to avoid further delay, has asked the labour court to record the evidence and give its findings while keeping this letters patent appeal alive. this has been done by consent. if this approach was not to be adopted the lpa could have been disposed of at that stage by passing ..... dismissed the writ petition by the impugned judgment and order dated 10th/11th january 2002. 10. it is this judgment and order which is assailed in the present letters patent appeal. it was submitted on behalf of the appellant-company that the view taken by the learned single judge was not correct. in a case where the enquiry is ..... with continuity in service and full back wages from the date of dismissal i.e. 31.1.1986 till reinstatement. 2. the relevant facts leading to this letters patent appeal are as follows:-the appellant is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing jeep-type vehicles and tractors amongst other products. the appellant has one of its ..... h.l. gokhale, j.1. this letters patent appeal seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 10th/11th january 2002 rendered by a learned single judge of this court in writ petition no. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 2005 (HC)

Manoj Gulabrao Patel Vs. the State of Maharashtra,

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-31-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)ALLMR68

..... general at the time of admission is suffice to protect the appellant till the final disposal of the criminal prosecution pending as of today. therefore, we dispose of the letters patent appeal by the following order: if the prosecution which was in existence and pending, when the commissioner passed the impugned order, is yet pending as on today then the statement ..... be passed by the commissioner though costs is not being enforced as against the petitioner. in fact, on such statement being made the appellant ought to have withdrawn the letters patent appeal. this shows that the government was not desirous of implementing the said impugned order and instead they desire to proceed for action in accordance with law including action for ..... petitioner is acquitted. therefore, the single judge rejected the petition in limine by order dated 4th june, 2002. as against this the present letters patent appeal is filed. however, at the time of admission of this letters patent appeal the statement was made by the advocate general that the respondent will not enforce the order dated 12th april, 2002 requiring licensee to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 15 2005 (HC)

Maharashtra State Electricity Board, Vs. Vilas Kisan Nehete and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-15-2005

Reported in : 2005(3)ALLMR524; [2005(106)FLR1088]; (2005)IIILLJ321Bom; 2005(3)MhLj371

..... matters on its own merits within a period of four months from the date of receipt of writ form this court (5) in view of the disposal of the letters patent appeal, civil application nos. 97 of 2003 and 246 of 2003 do not survive. they are accordingly disposed of. (6) parties are directed to obtain an authenticated copy of this ..... pertaining to the merits of the case have been kept open to be dealt with by the member, industrial court. 6. we, therefore, pass the following order. order(1) letters patent appeal is allowed. (2) the order dated 8th october 2002 passed by the learned single judge in writ petition no. 5530 of 2002 is hereby quashed and set aside. equally ..... by the member, industrial court rejecting the misc. applications (ulp) nos. 7 to 12 of 1997 are not proper and requires to be set aside. we accordingly allow the letters patent appeal.5. we make it clear that we have accepted a prayer of the appellant to set aside the order passed in misc. applications (ulp) no. 7 to 12 of ..... s.b. mhase, j.1. this letters patent appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single judge passed in writ petition no. 5530 of 2002 on 8th october 2002 whereby the said writ petition .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 26 2005 (HC)

Somsingh Chandrasingh Thakur Vs. Head Master, CaptaIn R.M. Oak School ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-26-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)ALLMR610; 2006(2)BomCR673; 2005(4)MhLj946

h.l. gokhale, j.1. this letters patent appeal seeks to challenge the order passed by a single judge on 9th february 2004 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant herein to challenge the decision and order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 2005 (HC)

P.M. Ghare and ors. Vs. Jaysynth Anthraquinone Ltd. and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-11-2005

Reported in : 2005(5)BomCR45; [2005(107)FLR1132]; (2006)ILLJ388Bom; 2005(4)MhLj782

..... in the two appeals are filed by individuals who are employees of the 1st respondent-company. through these civil applications, leave is sought to file and prosecute the two letters patent appeals. the applications have become necessary since the applicants are desirous of challenging the common order passed by a learned single judge (dr. d.y. chandrachud, j.) in two writ .....

Tag this Judgment!

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