Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: punjab and haryana Year: 2002 Page 1 of about 52 results (0.030 seconds)

Apr 24 2002 (HC)

Smt. Sudarshan Chopra and ors. Vs. Vijay Kumar Chopra and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-24-2002

Reported in : [2003]117CompCas660(P& H)

..... was absolute and not subject to any exceptions. it is true that, under the code of 1908, an appeal did lie under the letters patent from an order passed by a single judge of a chartered high court in arbitration proceedings even if the order, was passed in exercise of appellate ..... court was to determine a controversy arising out of the interpretation of section 9 of the arbitration act, 1940. the pointed question was whether a letter patent appeal was competent against an order passed by a single judge of the high court, in terms of the provisions of section 39(2) of the ..... court that once a matter under the trade marks act, 1940, comes before the high court, the powers available to the high court under letters patent can also be exercised by the high court to correct errors in orders passed by the learned single judges of that court. the same principle, it ..... power flowing from the paramount character under which the high court functions would not get excluded unless the statutory enactment concerned expressly excludes appeals under letters patent. no such bar is discernible from section 6(3) of the act. it could not be seriously contended by learned counsel for the respondents that ..... other appellate jurisdiction and when such jurisdiction is exercised by a single judge, his judgment becomes subject to appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent, there being nothing to the contrary in the trade marks act.'14.3 it is further submitted that the aforesaid principle was reiterated by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 05 2002 (HC)

Sachdeva Rice Mills and ors. Vs. Smt. Raj Anand and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-05-2002

Reported in : I(2003)ACC53; 2003ACJ1482; (2003)133PLR23

..... .1. by this order, we are disposing of letters patent appeal nos. 33 to 36 of 1987, letters patent appeal nos.837 and 838 of 1986 alongwith cross objection no. 3 in letters patent appeal no. 837 of 1986, letters patent appeal nos. 10 to 13 of 1987 with cross objection no. 9 in letters patent appeal no. 10 of 1987 which are directed against .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 02 2002 (HC)

Sidhu Roadlines Regd. and ors. Vs. the State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-02-2002

Reported in : (2003)134PLR280

..... a tax is compensatory or not is to enquire whether the trades people are having the use of certain facilities for the better conduct of their business and paying not patently much more than want is required for providing the facilities. it would be impossible to judge the compensatory nature of a tax by a meticulous test, and in the nature ..... . once, this purpose is established, the state has considerable discretion in the method, measure and amount of tax. the formula prescribed has not been shown to be resulting in any patent injustice and, therefore, the direction of the state cannot be interfered with. in fact, in g.k. krishnan's case (supra), the argument that the tax could be levied only ..... a tax is compensatory or not is to enquire whether the trades people are having the use of certain facilities for the better conduct of their business and paying not patently much more than what is required for providing the facilities and that we would be impossible to judge the compensatory nature of a tax by meticulous test, and in the ..... a tax is compensatory or not is to enquire whether the trades people are having the use of certain facilities for the better conduct of their business and paying not patently much more than what is required for providing the facilities.22. this view stands reaffirmed in g.k. krishan etc. v. state of tamil nadu and anr. etc., a.i .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2002 (HC)

Jagdev Singh Vs. Sardarni Prem Parkash Kaur and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-26-2002

Reported in : AIR2002P& H330

..... were in possession of the sites even in the year 1948-49 and that the grants must have been made even by then. the second was that there was a patent illegality in permitting the appellant to question, in a single writ petition, 'settlement', made in favour of the different respondents. we are afraid that neither of the reasons mentioned by ..... code is not followed. therefore, the four issues directed to be tried as preliminary issues could not be treat2d as preliminary issues and the order dated 5.5.1995 being patently illegal was liable to be reviewed and the impugned order dismissing the application for review is thus liable to be set aside. his second submission is that the four issues ..... as preliminary issues.3. the plaintiff-petitioner filed an application on 31.5.1995 seeking review of the order dated 5.5.1995 by urging that the aforementioned order was patently against the law because only those issues could be treated and decided as preliminary issues where no evidence was required to be led, it was further urged that the trial .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 2002 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Shibboo Mal and Sons and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-21-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)ARBLR628(P& H); (2003)134PLR541

..... , is alien to the scope and ambit of challenge of an award under the arbitration act. where the error of finding of facts having a bearing on the award is patent and is easily demonstrable without the necessity of carefully weighing the various possible viewpoints, the interference with award based on erroneous finding of fact is permissible. similarly, if an award ..... is based by applying a principle of law which is patently erroneous, and but for such erroneous application of legal principle, the award could not have been made such award is liable to be set aside by holding that there has ..... a legal misconduct on the part of the arbitrator. in ultimate analysis, it is a question of delicate balancing between the permissible limit of error of law and fact and patently erroneous finding easily demonstrable from the materials on record and application of principle of law forming the basis of the award which is ..... patently erroneous. it may be indicated here that however objectively the problem may be viewed, the subjective element inherent in the judge deciding the problem, is bound to creep in and .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 28 2002 (HC)

Jagroop Singh and anr. Vs. Boria Khan and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-28-2002

Reported in : [2003]263ITR391(P& H)

..... auction-purchaser-petitioners and entries to that effect have been made in the jamaban-dis. therefore, it is claimed that the order passed by the learned district judge suffers from patent illegality and no appeal is competent before him. it is further claimed that against he order dismissing the objections filed by objector respondent no. 1 vide order dated 16.8 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 22 2002 (HC)

Haryana Organics (a Unit of Globus Agromics Limited) Vs. the State of ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-22-2002

Reported in : (2003)133PLR265; [2003]132STC397(P& H)

..... give definite meaning to words employed in the act and adopt an interpretation which would tend to do violence to the express language as well as the plain meaning and patent aim and object underlying the various other provisions of the act.33. in bharti telecom ltd., v. the commissioner of customs, j.t. 2001(9) supreme court 501, the apex .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 2002 (HC)

Dalbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-05-2002

Reported in : AIR2003P& H113

..... , air 1958 sc 86, wherein the constitution bench of the supreme court had held as under :--'if an inferior court or tribunal of first instance acts wholly without jurisdiction or patently in excess of jurisdiction or manifestly conducts the proceedings before it in a manner which is contrary to the rules of natural justice and all accepted rules of procedure and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 25 2002 (HC)

S. Manohar Singh Vs. S. Aridaman Singh Dhillon

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-25-2002

Reported in : (2003)133PLR231

..... . since the rules made on the appellate side, either for entertaining he appeals under clause 15 of the letters patent or appeals arising under the contempt of courts, had not expressly excluded, section 5 of the limitation act becomes applicable. we hold that section 5 of the limitation act does ..... , limitation stands prescribed as a special law under section 19 of the contempt of courts act and limitation in filing letters patent appeal stands attracted. in consequence, section 4 to 24 of the limitation act stands attracted to letters patent appeal in so far as and to the extent to which they are not expressly excluded either by special or local law .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 10 2002 (HC)

Balihar Singh and ors. Vs. Punjab University, Chandigarh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-10-2002

Reported in : [2003(96)FLR479]

..... of the provisos of section 2(oo), in such a situation it has to be inferred reasonably that the dispensation of the service of the workman is covered by the patent wording which means the termination by the employer of the service of a workman for any reason whatsoever. section 25-f is mandatory in character and if at the time .....

Tag this Judgment!


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