Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: punjab and haryana Year: 1966 Page 1 of about 144 results (0.018 seconds)

Dec 15 1966 (HC)

Ude Bhan and ors. Vs. Kapoor Chand and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-15-1966

Reported in : AIR1967P& H53

..... 7. the respective counsel for the judgment-debtors have taken up slightly different positions. mr. roop chand, who represents the judgment-debtors in the letters patent appeal maintained that the term 'main residential house' as referred to in the clause must be taken in the sense of one entire building as ..... the judgment-debtor. question no. 3, therefore, arises only in the two execution second appeals and not in the letters patent appeal.6. one of the modes of execution of decrees, which are given in section 51 of the code is by attachment and sale or ..... by the judgment-debtor and his family while there were tenants in the portions of the respective houses, which were under attachment. in the letters patent appeal the tenant had been inducted by the judgment-debtor himself while in the other two cases he was in the premises without the volition of ..... ordered that the remaining portion of the house be released from attachment. the single judge having dismissed the judgment-debtor's appeal he filed a letters patent appeal.5. thus, the common factor in the three cases was that a part only in each of the houses in dispute was occupied for ..... these questions arise in three appeals from execution proceedings .. .. .. executionsecond appeal no. 450 of 1963, execution second appeal no. 812 of 1963 and letters patent appeal no. 120 of 1963. the facts of the cases giving rise to these appeals have been given in the referring order and it is only necessary .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1966 (HC)

Smt. Dr. Deep Kaur Vs. the State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jul-20-1966

Reported in : AIR1967P& H213; (1968)ILLJ760P& H

..... . against this decision, she preferred regular second appeal no. 1410 of 1960 to this court which also failed and against which the present appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent has been filed before us. the decision only on issue no. (2) has been challenged.3. on issue no. (2), two contentions were advanced before the learned single judge, namely ..... d.k. mahajan, j.1. this is an appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent and is directed against the decision of a learned single judge of this court affirming, on appeal, the decision of the lower appellate court.2. so tar as the facts .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 1966 (HC)

State of Punjab Vs. Parsa Singh Teji

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-03-1966

Reported in : AIR1967P& H238

h.r. khanna, j.1. this appeal under clause x of the letters patent by the state of punjab is directed against the order of the learned single judge whereby he accepted the petition under article 226 of the constitution of india filed by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 1966 (HC)

Punjab State and ors. Vs. Sukh Dev Sarup Gupta

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-06-1966

Reported in : AIR1967P& H416; [1966]18STC426(P& H)

h.r. khanna, j.1. this appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent by the punjab state and two others is directed against the order of learned single judge whereby he accepted the petition under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 1966 (HC)

Bansi and anr. Vs. Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings and ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-03-1966

Reported in : AIR1967P& H28

..... filed by another person named sikander singh on the same facts and on the same grounds had been dismissed earlier by the division bench. the letters patent bench inter alia referred to some observations in daryao's case, air 1961 sc 1457 (supra) and remarked that it could be plausibly argued that ..... appellants has also relied upon certain observations in piara singh v. punjab state, 1962 pun lr 547: (air 1962 punj 498). this was a letters patent appeal against the order of a single judge whereby the writ petition of piara singh under article 226 of the constitution was dismissed on the sole ground ..... on the grounds which have arisen after the rejection of the previous application but so far as the writ petition for certiorari giving rise to this letters patent appeal is concerned, it would fully apply.6. in a recent judgment of the supreme court ramesh v. gendalal motilal, 1966 curr lj 152: ( ..... article 32 of the constitution and their lordships of the supreme court did not have before them the precise question which is agitated in this letters patent appeal viz. whether the dismissal in limine of a writ petition under article 226 of the constitution by a bench of the high court would ..... so advised the petitioners could go in appeal and agitate this matter again for reference of the question to a full bench. that is how this letters patent appeal is before the full bench.3. mr. g.c. mital, learned counsel for the appellants, has placed his main reliance on certain observations contained .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1966 (HC)

State of Punjab and ors. Vs. Appar Apar Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jul-21-1966

Reported in : AIR1967P&H139

..... respondent's petition under article 226 of the constitution of india and quashed the order. it is against this decision that the present appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent has been preferred by the state government.5. before dealing with the only ground, on which the decision has gone in favour of the respondent, it will be proper to ..... d.k. mahajan, j.1. this is an appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent and is directed against the order of a learned single judge of this court allowing the petition of one. shri apparapar singh, under article 226 of the constitution of india .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 1966 (HC)

Prithvi Chand, Chandu Mal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-21-1966

Reported in : AIR1967P& H195

..... article 226 because of the willingness of the department to give the benefit of the new rules to the petitioners as stated by the learned government counsel.3. on letters patent appeal in this court, the short question canvassed on behalf of the appellant relates to the vires of the amended rule 49 of the displaced persons (c and r) rules ..... 1. this judgment will dispose of four letters patent appeals (letters patent appeals nos. 57d, 58d, 59d of 1962 and 73d of 1965). main arguments have been addressed in l, p. a. 58-d of 1962 and it is conceded that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 1966 (HC)

Rudra Talkies and ors. Vs. Prem Sagar and Co. and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-16-1966

Reported in : AIR1967P& H348

..... applied for being impleaded as petitioners in the case and whose application had been granted subject to just exceptions, have come up in appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent.3. mr. g.c. mittal, learned counsel for the appellants, has contended---(i) that the view of the learned single judge that the impugned order of exemption being of administrative .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 1966 (HC)

Balwant Singh Dharam Singh Vs. Sodhi Lal Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-18-1966

Reported in : AIR1966P& H483

..... of the law, and the proper remedy of the appellant was by way of a writ petition for certiorari to this court, which can interfere in such matters where a patently wrong view has been taken, as in the present case. the result is that i would accept the appeal with costs and quash the orders of the financial commissioner and ..... d. falshaw, c.j.1. this is an appeal filed by balwant singh under clause 10 of the letters patent against the order of harbans singh, j., dismissing his petition filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution.2. the facts are not in dispute. sodhi lal singh respondent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 1966 (HC)

Yogeshwar Raj Puri Vs. Yog Raj Puri and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-25-1966

Reported in : AIR1967P& H163

1. this is an appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent against a judgment of a learned single judge who had affirmed in appeal a preliminary decree for rendition of accounts granted by the courts below in favour of respondent no. .....

Tag this Judgment!


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