Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: mumbai Year: 2005 Page 9 of about 154 results (0.009 seconds)

Jun 16 2005 (HC)

Sanjay Sampatrao Gaikwad Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-16-2005

Reported in : II(2006)ACC424; 2006ACJ656; AIR2005Bom409

..... that regard is pronounced, and the railway administration would be liable to pay interest therefrom but not prior to that date.21. for the reasons stated above, therefore, the letters patent appeals partly succeed. the impugned judgment is therefore to be set aside while allowing the appeals to the extent that the compensation as was awarded by the railway tribunal along ..... regarding the appellant-gaikwad being a bona fide passenger has attained finality for all purposes and it is too late for the respondent to agitate the same in the letters patent appeal filed by the appellant, and that too, without any material on record to substantiate the said contention.17. the next point which arises for consideration pertains to the liability .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 2005 (HC)

Shri Filipe Nery Rodrigues, Member of the Legislative Assembly of Goa ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-21-2005

Reported in : 2006(2)BomCR424; (2006)108BOMLR227

..... senior counsel submitted that the tribunal examined the evidence in a perverse manner and drew the conclusions which, on the face of it, are erroneous. this would, obviously is a patent perversity in appreciation of evidence by the tribunal and rendering the conclusion based on such perverse appreciation of evidence, is not only absurd but totally perverse. in order to substantiate ..... to file reply, in our view, cannot even remotely be considered to be reasonable. on the other hand, it is wholly unreasonable and the interim order is, therefore, passed in patent violation of the principles of natural justice and hurry in which it is passed shows the oblique motive which renders the interim order mala fide. 54. so far as applicability .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 2005 (HC)

Chandrakant Devu Shinde Vs. Director, Chhatrapati Shahu Central Instit ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-21-2005

Reported in : [2005(107)FLR616]

..... with persons who are looking for help for rehabilitation or for restoring the normal marital life. under these circumstances, the view taken by the industrial court cannot be termed as patently erroneous so as to call for interference under the supervisory powers of this court under article 227 of the constitution. the finding that, the petitioner was not a 'workman' within ..... .d. act by the labour court but the same view was set aside by the learned single judge of the high court. however, the division bench while entertaining the letters patent appeal set aside the judgment of the learned single judge and restored the award passed by the labour court for reinstatement. the supreme court referred to its earlier decisions in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 2005 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Hinditron Services (P.) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-25-2005

Reported in : (2006)99ITD479(Mum.)

..... or incorporeal. though it does not always mean physical property but it does mean the right, title, interest in a property. property also includes rights such as trade marks, copyrights, patents and even intellectual rights capable of transfer or transmission. they also include beneficial rights to a thing considered as having money value especially with reference to transfer/succession and their .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 2005 (HC)

M.G. Bhide Vs. Britannia Industries Ltd.,

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-23-2005

Reported in : 2005(3)MhLj659

..... certiorari;(b) if it is reasonably possible to form two opinions on the same material, the finding arrived at one way or the other, cannot be faulted with as a patent error.(c) the jurisdiction to exercise supervisory powers is not available for indulging in reappreciation or evaluation of evidence or correcting the errors in drawing inferences like a court of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 2005 (HC)

Welcomgroup Searock Vs. Searock Hotel Employees' Union and Anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-24-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)ALLMR74; 2006(2)BomCR899; [2005(106)FLR692]; (2005)IIILLJ483Bom; 2005(3)MhLj191

..... to the definition in section 2(m) of the factories act, 1948 which specifically excludes the establishment of an hotel. in that view of the matter, the industrial court was patently in error in holding that the provisions of chapter v-b of the industrial disputes act, 1947 were attracted. 7. in the decision in poona industrial hotel (supra), the court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 2005 (HC)

National Bicycle Corporation of India Ltd. and anr. Vs. Ramlakhan Sara ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-07-2005

Reported in : 2005(5)BomCR370; [2005(106)FLR154]; 2005(2)MhLj980a

..... that he had collected his retiral dues and that he had furnished a receipt in full and final settlement.12. the order of the industrial court is, in these circumstances, patently unsustainable and warrants the interference of this court. the order ignores the material evidence and suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record. the interference of this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 2005 (HC)

Indian Airlines Ltd. Vs. Premchand

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-10-2005

Reported in : 2005(3)BomCR605; 2005(2)MhLj1018

..... produced the leave and attendance record and the workman stated that he was satisfied with the attendance record that was shown to him. that being the position, the tribunal was patently in error in holding that the workman should have been asked to cross-examine the witness. the workman accepted the attendance record and in fact he did not dispute the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 2005 (HC)

Tata Infomedia Limited Vs. Tata Press Employees' Union and Anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-23-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)BomCR559; [2006(108)FLR890]; 2005(3)MhLj105

..... allowed a revision application filed by the employer. a petition under article 226 filed by the workman was dismissed by the single judge of the high court. however, a letters patent appeal was allowed by the division bench against which the employer went in appeal to the supreme court. the complaint in that case was inter alia under item l(a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 2005 (HC)

Mrs. Neelima Sadanand Vartak Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-12-2005

Reported in : AIR2005Bom431; 2005(4)ALLMR495; 2005(5)BomCR750; 2005(4)MhLj326

..... required by section 24(4) was prepared by the district magistrate in consultation with the district and sessions judge. in paras 18 and 19, the court held that there was patent infraction of the statutory provisions and that there was no effective or real consultation between the sessions judge and the district magistrate. the slp was, therefore, allowed and the district .....

Tag this Judgment!


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