Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: supreme court of india Year: 2004 Page 9 of about 108 results (0.235 seconds)

Aug 19 2004 (SC)

U.P. State Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Shakti Bhatta Udyog ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-19-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC4388; 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)1197; 2004(4)AWC2891(SC); JT2004(6)SC553; RLW2004(4)SC486; 2004(7)SCALE50; (2004)8SCC70; (2004)3UPLBEC2717

..... 28, 1971, in respect of land, which was away from the land in question and which had pits of 10 ft. deep, cannot be upheld.in this regard, one more patent error, committed by the reference court, is apparent. the reference court observed that 'this is noteworthy that there is no highway near this land. during the course of arguments, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 2004 (SC)

Dasari Siva Prasad Reddy Vs. the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-20-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC4383; 2004(2)ALD(Cri)677; II(2004)DMC383SC; JT2004(6)SC489; 2004(7)SCALE59; (2004)11SCC282

p. venkatarama reddi, j.1. by the impugned judgment, the high court of andhra pradesh reversed the acquittal recorded by the sessions judge and convicted the appellant under section 302 ipc and sentenced him to life imprisonment however, the acquittal under section 498a was confirmed.2. the appellant, who was an elementary school teacher, married the victim lakshmi devi in the year 1991. a daughter and son were born to them in 1993 and 1995 respectively. at the crucial time they were residing in pulivendla, cuddapah district.3. it is the case of the prosecution that there were intermittent quarrels between the couple and there were also demands from the appellant for additional dowry. the accused even suspected the fidelity of his wife.4. on the morning of 20th april, 1996, lakshmi devi was found dead lying on a cot with injuries on the neck and forehead. a jute twine rope was found underneath the cot, according to some of the witnesses. the first one amongst the prosecution witnesses who noticed her unnatural death was her brother (pw3) who was a lecturer residing in the same town. he went to the house of the accused at about 6.30 a.m. having been informed by the accused that something happened to his sister. the accused himself took pw3 to his house. according to the prosecution, the accused made himself scarce thereafter. pw3 sent a jeep to bring his parents living in a nearby village. the parents of the deceased, her brother and other relations came down to pulivendla .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 2004 (SC)

State of U.P. Vs. Kishan Chand and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-20-2004

Reported in : 2004(2)ALD(Cri)759; JT2004(6)SC535; 2004(7)SCALE75; (2004)7SCC629

h.k. sema, j. 1. nine accused were put on trial before the addl. sessions judge. during the pendency of the trial, one accused died, therefore, eight accused have faced the trial. at the end of the trial, the trial court acquitted accused nos. 6, 7, and 8 of all the charges. no appeal was preferred by the state against their acquittal. the five accused (respondents herein) namely kishan chand, rama shankar, ram chandra, gauri shankar and chhotey lal were convicted under various sections of law as follows:-accused kishan chand was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under sections 302/34 and 302/149 i.p.c. six months r.i. under section 323 i.p.c. one years r.i. under section 148 i.p.c. and 5 years r.i. under section 307 read with section 149 i.p.c. and 5 years r.i.2. accused rama shankar was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under section 302 i.p.c. one year r.i. under section 148 i.p.c. 5 years r.i. under section 307/149 i.p.c. and 6 months r.i. under section 323 read with 34 i.p.c. 3. accused ram chandra son of bala sukh and gauri shanker were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under section 302 read with section 34 i.p.c. and section 302 read with section 149 i.p.c. six months r.i. under section 323/34 i.p.c. one year r.i. under section 149 and 5 years r.i. under section 307 read with section 149 i.p.c. 4. accused chhotey lal was sentenced to undergo one year r.i. under section 148 i.p.c. life imprisonment under section 302/149 i.p.c. and five years r.i. under .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 2004 (SC)

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. Vs. Chairman, Central Board, Direct Tax ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-07-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC2434; (2004)189CTR(SC)97; 2004(168)ELT147(SC); [2004]267ITR647(SC); 2004(5)SCALE705; (2004)6SCC431

order1. leave granted.2. this appeal is against the judgment dated 24th august, 2000. 3. mr. rohatgi has raised a preliminary objection to the special leave petition being proceeded with by this court. he submits that this court has, in the case of oil and natural gas commission v. collector of central excise reported in : 1992(61)elt3(sc) , held that in every case where a dispute is between government departments and/or between a government department and a public sector undertaking, the matter should be referred to the high powered committee established by the government pursuant to an order of this court dated 11th september, 1991. he pointed out that it has been held by this court that it is the duty of every court or tribunal to demand clearance from the committee and that in the absence of clearance the proceedings must not be proceeded with.4. mr. rohatgi also relied upon the case of c.c.e. v. jeesop and co. ltd. reported in (1999) 9 scc 181 wherein this court has again disposed of an appeal filed by the collector of central excise against two public sector companies by holding that the course indicated in oil and natural gas commission's case (supra) has to be followed. he also relied on a decision of this court in the case of canara bank v. national thermal power corporation reported in (2001) 1 scc 43 wherein it has been held that the purpose of the directions in oil and natural gas commission's case (supra) is to see that frivolous litigation between government .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2004 (SC)

Basheer @ N.P. Basheer Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-20-2004

Reported in : 2004CriLJ3837; 2004(94)ECC116; 2004(175)ELT12(SC); 2004(2)KLT1018(SC); 2004(5)SCALE688; (2004)5SCC659

order1. the appellant has been found guilty for the offence punishable under section 21 of the ndps act. the special judge sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of rs. 1 lac with a default sentence for 6 months. the conviction and sentence was challenged by the appellant before the high court. the high court confirmed the conviction and sentence.2. the prosecution case against the appellant was that on 23.2.2000 at about 4.15 p.m. the appellant was found in selling brown sugar. the pw-2 sub-inspector of police of nadakkavu police station got information that somebody was selling brown sugar and he recorded this information, copy of the same sent to immediate superior and along with the police party went to the place and he found the appellant there. on seeing pw-2 and others, the appellant tried to escape from the place and pw-2 prevented him from going and told him that it was suspected that the appellant was having brown sugar with him and his body is to be searched. pw-2 also apprised the appellant of his right under section 50 of the ndps act, and the appellant declined to have the privilege of his body being searched in the presence of magistrate/gazetted officer and therefore a search was conducted and from the pocket of the appellant small packets were recovered wherein brown sugar was found. pw-2 prepared a mazhar and recovered the same. on the side of the prosecution pws. 1 to 3 were examined. the appellant alleged that he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 2004 (SC)

Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs. Dheer Singh Bhatti

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-24-2004

Reported in : IV(2004)CPJ33(SC); JT2004(8)SC17; 2004(8)SCALE187; (2005)9SCC555

s. n. variava, j.1. leave granted.2. before this court a large number of appeals have been filed by the haryana urban development authority and/or the ghaziabad development authority challenging orders of the national consumer disputes redressal commission, granting to complainants, interest at the rate of 18% per annum irrespective of the fact of each case. this court has, in the case of ghaziabad development authority vs . balbir singh : air2004sc2141 , deprecated this practice. this court has held that interest at the rate of 18% cannot be granted in all cases irrespective of the facts of the case. this court has held that the consumer forums could grant damages/compensation for mental agony/harassment where it finds misfeasance in public office. this court has held that such compensation is a recompense for the loss or injury and it necessarily has to be based on a finding of loss or injury and must co-relate with the amount of loss or injury. this court has held that the forum or the commission thus had to determine that there was deficiency in service and/or misfeasance in public office and that it has resulted in loss or injury. this court has also laid down certain other guidelines which the forum or the commission has to follow in future cases.3. this court is now taking up the cases before it for disposal as per principles set out in earlier judgment. on taking the cases we find that the copies of the claim/petitions made by the respondent/complainant and the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 2004 (SC)

Vasantiben Prahladji Nayak and ors. Vs. Somnath Muljibhai Nayak and or ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-09-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC1893; 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)432; 2004(2)AWC1784(SC); (SCSuppl)2004(3)CHN60; 98(2004)CLT276(SC); (2004)2GLR1335; [2004(2)JCR272(SC)]; (2004)137PLR303; 2004(3)SCALE172; (2

s.h. kapadia, j. 1. appellants (plaintiffs) filed a suit bearing no. 116 of 1968 in the court of civil judge, narol for a declaration that they were owners of ancestral house site land bearing g.p. no.497 in sarkhej, district ahmedabad and for recovery of possession thereof from the respondents (defendants) and also for permanent injunction restraining respondents from interfering with their possession over the disputed land. according to the appellants, the suit land was ancestral property belonging to father-in-law of vasantiben (appellant no. 1) and after his death the property came in possession of her husband. according, to the appellants, in the lifetime of the husband of appellant no. 1, the respondents used to tell the husband of appellant no. 1 to allow them to make construction on the land. according to appellant no. 1, her husband did not permit the respondents to make construction till his death, i.e. six years prior to the institution of the suit. that even before his demise, the respondents used to tell appellant no. 1 to donate the land to the community which she refused and soon thereafter the respondents started constructing a compound wall without her permission. in the circumstances, she filed a suit on 25th march, 1968 to prevent the respondents from disturbing her possession.2. the respondents inter alia denied in the suit that the husband of appellant no. 1 was in possession of the suit land till he died or that after his demise, the appellants were in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 2004 (SC)

Hardesh Ores Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Timblo Minerals Pvt. Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-16-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC1884; 2004(2)AWC1706(SC); 2004(1)CTLJ351(SC); [2004(2)JCR188(SC)]; 2004(3)SCALE443; (2004)4SCC64; 2004(2)LC857(SC)

d.m. dharmadhikari, j. 1. the dispute in these appeals between the appellant as iron ore raising/purchase contractor and the respondents who claim to have been duly appointed as new contractors by the mine owner is regarding their rival claims to exclusively run the iron ore mine which is the subject matter of the suit instituted by the new contractors.2. the appellant company [shortly referred to as the old contractor] claims right to run the mine on the basis of their alleged existing contract with the mining-lease-owner. according to the appellant, the contract with them was renewed by acceptance of their offer of renewal and consequent conduct of permitting them to work the mine on periodical payments of price in accordance with the original terms of the contract.3. the case of the contesting respondent nos. 1 & 2, who are plaintiffs before the trial court [shortly referred to as the new contractors], is that the mining-lease-owner has refused to renew the contract with the appellant and has entered into a fresh contract on payment of higher price with them.4. the trial court granted an ex parte temporary injunction in favour of the new contractors. after hearing both the parties at length, the ex parte interim injunction earlier granted under order 39 rules 1 & 2 of the code of civil procedure was vacated by the trial court.5. aggrieved by the order of the trial court refusing to confirm the order of temporary injunction, the new contractors appealed to the high court. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 2004 (SC)

Sakatar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-13-2004

Reported in : 2004(2)ALD(Cri)36; 2004CriLJ2076; I(2004)DMC730SC; JT2004(Suppl1)SC147; 2004(4)SCALE529; (2004)11SCC291

n. santosh hegde, j. 1. the first appellant before us is the father of the second appellant and the third appellant is the wife of the first appellant. these appellants and three others who are sisters of second appellant herein were charged for offences punishable under sections 306 and 498a read with section 34 ipc before the additional sessions judge, ambala who after trial acquitted accused nos. 4 to 6 while convicted the appellants herein for offences punishable under sections 306 and 498a of the ipc read with section 34 ipc. the first appellant sakatar singh was sentenced for offence punishable under section 306 for four years ri and a fine of rs. 500/- and in default in payment of fine to undergo further ri for three months, while he was sentenced for an offence punishable under section 498a for two years ri and a fine of rs. 200/- and in default in payment of fine to undergo further ri for one month. the second appellant kirpal singh was sentenced for seven years ri for offence punishable under section 306 ipc and a fine of rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further ri for three months, he was also sentenced to two years ri under section 498a ipc and a fine of rs. 200/- and in default in payment of fine to undergo further ri for one month. the third appellant smt. joginder kaur was sentenced to undergo three years ri for offence under section 306 and a fine of rs. 200/- and in default in payment of fine to undergo further ri for one month. while .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 2004 (SC)

Dhanvanthkumariba and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-01-2004

Reported in : (2005)1GLR159; JT2004(8)SC425; 2004(8)SCALE438; (2004)8SCC121; 2005(1)LC462(SC)

shivaraj v. patil j. 1. the appellants are the legal representatives of padhiar jagdevsinghji ramsinghji who was ex-ruler of erstwhile state of umeta which comprised of five villages including umeta. according to him, the lands of these villages belonged to him. in the year 1948, the state of umeta was merged into india under the merger agreement dated 24.05.1948. the land bearing survey no. 410 which is the disputed land is situated at village umeta. by virtue of merger agreement, this land was also given to ex-ruler as talukdar. the land bearing survey no. 410 comprised of large area - 742 acres and 32 guntas. the bombay talukdari tenure abolition act, 1949 (for short `the act') came into force on 15.8.1950. according to the respondent-state, the said land bearing survey no. 410 vested in the government by virtue of section 6 of the act. the government transferred 560 acres out of this land to the district panchyat, kheda. hence, the ex-ruler filed civil suit o.s. no. 5 of 1970 contending that the transfer of the land by the government in favour of the district panchyat was wrong as it belonged to him and government had no authority to transfer the land when the said land had not vested in the government. in that suit, reliefs of declaration, possession and permanent injunction were sought. the trial court decreed the said suit. the first appeal filed by the respondent against the decree of the trial court was allowed by learned single judge of the high court, reversing the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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