Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: punjab and haryana Year: 1980 Page 1 of about 68 results (0.016 seconds)

May 06 1980 (HC)

Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Manjit Kaur ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-06-1980

Reported in : AIR1981P& H60

..... for the assumption of any fast or rash driving by sehdev seth appellant. it has already been noticed that there is no direct evidence on the point and circumstantial evidence patently negatives any such inference. again the fact the impact of the accident was on the front portion of the car can raise neither an inference of fast speed nor of ..... of rash or negligent driving and was, therefore, not liable under any of the charges framed against him. eve though the said finding is not binding yet its relevance is patent.9. the only reason given by the learned singly judge in holding that sehdev seth appellant was to a large extent responsible for the accident seems to be that the ..... the findings of the fact arrived at by the learned singly judge himself. these have indeed been not seriously assailed even on behalf of the claimants with regard to the patent negligence, on the part of harbans singh deceased in driving the scooter he first observed as follows:--'in the appeal, i have gone through the evidence with help of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 07 1980 (HC)

Devinder Singh Vs. Mangal Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-07-1980

Reported in : AIR1981P& H53

..... by a stranger during the vehicle's entrustment to a workshop for repairs is the meaningful question which arises for determination in this appeal under clause x of the letters patent.2. on february 23, 1968, at about mid-day mangal singh, injured respondent, whilst going on his bicycle, with in the town of moga, collided with truck no. pnf 8078 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1980 (HC)

Karnail Singh and ors. Vs. Kapur Singh and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-18-1980

Reported in : AIR1980P& H202

..... , on which ad valorem court-fee has been paid, i, still pending decision?'2. the learned single judge, against whose judgment the present appeal under clause x of the letters patent has been filed, has on the basis of a division bench judgment of the lahore high court in budhuram v. niamat rai air 1923 lah 632, held that a fixed .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 30 1980 (HC)

Ajit Kaur and ors. Vs. the Punjab State and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-30-1980

Reported in : AIR1981P& H8

..... inheritance would cause affectation to the vesting of surplus area declared under the punjab and the pepsu laws in the state government but not under the reform law. the letters patent bench took a contrary view in holding that sub-section (7) would predominate over sub-section (5) and that surplus area determined under either of the three laws would not ..... the reform law alone, in this way, the learned singly judge practically read into it 'under this act' singularly causing obvious violation to the language of the statute. the letters patent bench upset that view by holding that they could not permit 'under this at' to be introduced in sub-section (7) and thus put it in a predominant position vis ..... into force of the reform law, unless it was re-declared or de-declared in the hands of the heirs, with due respect to the learned judge, of the letters patent bench this ethereal distinction is uncalled for ad would lead to illogical results, both the pepsu and the punjab law did not provide for affectation of surplus area. prior to ..... and the latter at the executory stage and the latter at the executory state in order to de-link permanently the landowner with his surplus area; and (5) the letters patent bench's decisions in jagar singh's case (air 1977 punj & har 114)(supra) is held not to be good law and hereby overruled.35. i have no difference to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 03 1980 (HC)

Gram Sabha, Begowal Vs. the State of Punjab and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-03-1980

Reported in : AIR1981P& H101

..... other point as to the effect of non-issue of the notice to the petitioners before the issue of the notification, was not gone into by the letters patent bench. therefore, dewan chand's case (air 1979 punj & har 46)(supra) is clearly distinguishable so far as the facts of the present case are ..... provision of sec 10. which was so drastic in nature that by exercising power under that section a fully grown committee could be abolished. the letter patent bench agreed with this reasoning of the learned single judge and held section 10 to be ultra vires article 14 and 19 of the constitution. the ..... judge who, by judgment dated 23rd april, 1975, allowed the writ petition and quashed the notification. the state of punjab came up in letters patent appeal. the letters patent bench, although noticed that in section 5 to 7 of the act, provision for hearing of objections is made and no such provisions is made in ..... the section is violative of article 14 of the constitution and is thus ultra vires. support for this argument is sought from the decision of the letters patent bench in dewan chand's case (air 1979 punj & har 46)(supra). the facts of that case deserve to be noticed. the state government had ..... the act the area of any municipality constituted thereunder without inviting objections of the inhabitants of the municipality and this provision has been struck down by a letters patent bench of this court in state of punjab v. dewan chand 1978-80 pun lr 686: (air 1979 punj & har 46) and on the same .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 1980 (HC)

Bhagat Ram Vs. the State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-21-1980

Reported in : AIR1981P& H163

..... )(supra) that in exercise of jurisdiction under article 226 of the constitution appreciation of evidence cannot be gone into. it has also been held by a letters patent bench of this court in l. p. a no. 45. of 1976 amritsar improvement trust v. jagdish rai decided on 10th august, 1978, that in ..... recorded above, it is held that the artificial categorisation made by the land acquisition collector and affirmed by the tribunal was clearly illegal which fact is patent on the face of the record and this court is competent to interfere to correct the mistake in exercise of its jurisdiction, in view of the ..... rs. 30/- per biswansi, and whole of the rest of the land had to be evaluated in the second block at a uniform rate. there is patent merit in the second part of the submission. the acquired land abuts on the gill road and, therefore, the land acquisition collector and the tribunal were ..... urban property and the collector and the tribunal were in error in considering the same to be agricultural and evaluating it as such. this is a patent error on the face of the record and as held by the supreme court in syed yukoob's case (air 1964 sc 477)(supra) this ..... be rural or agricultural in nature. its potentiality for development as residential for development as residential colonies within the municipality limits of ludhiana is thus too patent to deserve any great elaboration.'....it has been stated at the bar that in fact the notification bringing the area within the municipal limits was issued .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 21 1980 (HC)

Gopal Chand and ors. Vs. the Financial Commissioner, Revenue and

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-21-1980

Reported in : AIR1981P& H125

..... . 1, by the managing officer canceling a major part of the allotment in favour of shiv gir could be sustained in law? it was emphasised that the said order was patently without jurisdiction as under section 3a of the act, allotment once made could not be cancelled on the ground that the mortgage amount which was payable by the allotee had ..... this court. reference may be made to shiv dayal v. union of india, (1964) 66 punj lr 770; budha ram v. behari lal, (1969) 71 pun lr 93, and letters patent appeal no. 504 of 1972(dewan chand khazanchi ram v. chief settlement commr.) decided on mar., 20, 1974. the learned counsel for the petitioners, did not make any serious effort .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1980 (HC)

Romesh Kumar and ors. Vs. the Municipal Committee, Gurdaspur and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-03-1980

Reported in : AIR1981P& H295

..... that section 84(3) of the act barred the jurisdiction of the civil courts.8. in view of the aforesaid binding precedent it is not only unnecessary but would be patently wasteful to refer to earlier decisions of the high courts. nevertheless it becomes obligatory to notice the reliance buy the learned counsel for the appellant romesh kumar on the division ..... section by virtue of sub-clause 91) 9a) thereof. the appellate provision of section 84 and the bar of section 86 apply identically to all such proceedings. it is, therefore, patent that no distinction whatsoever can be drawn in the present case from the law as laid drawn in the present case from the law as laid down in munshi ram ..... respect of tax levied or assessment made under section 61. the case was ultimately carried by way of special leave to the supreme court. affirming the judgment of the letters patent bench, sarkaria, j., speaking for the bench, observed as follows:-'it is well-recognised that where a revenue statute provides for a person aggrieved by an assessment thereunder, a particular ..... on appeal the additional district judge reversed the judgment and decreed the suit. this in turn was affirmed in second appeal by the learned single judge but on a letters patent appeal having been preferred on behalf of the municipal committee, the division bench reversed the learned single judge's decision on the finding that sections 84 and 86 of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 07 1980 (HC)

Raj Kumar and anr. Vs. Amer Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-07-1980

Reported in : AIR1981P& H1

..... appears o be such sharp and long standing divergence of judicial opinion since the very enforcement of the code extending over well-nigh seventy years that it appears to me patently wasteful to re-examine the issue on principles. it is indeed not my intention to add yet further to the large mass of conflicting judicial literature on the point. it ..... has then been followed in la single bench judgment in jabar singh v. shadi, (1975) 77 pun lr 186: (air 1975 punj 373) which has been upheld by the letters patent bench in jabar singh v. shadi, (1978) 80 pun lr 681.10. it calls for pointed notice that the learned counsel for the appellants frankly conceded that he could cite ..... the side of the view we are inclined to take. it is well settled that a view long held in the jurisdiction is not to be upset except on the patent grounds that the same is either palpably wrong or is of a kind that following it would be perpetuating an error and resulting in public mischief. that is indeed far .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 30 1980 (HC)

Gurcharan Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-30-1980

Reported in : AIR1981P& H96

..... bench of this court in rattan singh's case (air 1976 punj 279)(supra). reliance in support of this proposition was made on a decision of this court in letters patent appeal no. 73 of 1976(bishna v. state of punjab) decided on 29th february 1980.* undoubtedly, it has been held in this judgment that incase objections under section 5a of .....

Tag this Judgment!


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