Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Court: andhra pradesh Page 1 of about 2,101 results (0.039 seconds)

Jan 06 1961 (HC)

Devi Dayal Marwah Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1963AP479

..... the business of the hyderabad potteries and to carry on the business of manufacturers, buyers and dealers in all kinds of clay work, chemical preparations and glazes whatsoever and obtain patents for them to carry out the other objects as set forth in the memorandum of association. on the 1st october, 1947, the company executed a deed of mortgage in favour .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 13 1961 (HC)

Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. Vs. Vendra Venkanna, Proprietor of Jai Bhara ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1963AP58

..... for the cement concrete of his make. the plaintiff-company was not entitled to any reliefs with regard to the alleged infringement of its patent as the patent had expired even before the filing of the suit. 12. it would appear that the plaintiff had given up the relief for accounts and ..... defendant) and its partners impleaded as defendants 2 to 5. the plaintiff claimed damages estimated at rs. 9,000/- for an alleged infringement of the patent. the other reliefs as claimed against the defendant in o.s. 53 of 1954 were also claimed against these defendants. 8. the defendants repudiated the ..... defendant-concern and sent his engineers and got the property and machinery valued. the plaintiff and its engineers never complained that the defendant had infringed the patent rights of the plaintiff. 7. the defendants in o.s. 54 of 1954 are the firm, sri radhakrishna reinforced cement pipe and ferro concrete works ..... pipes, had infringed the rights of the plaintiff by manufacturing and selling cement concrete pipes under the plaintiff's trade mark and name and using the patented machine and method for manufacturing the said cement pipes. 3. the defendant in o.s. no. 30 of 1954 is one vendra venkanna, proprietor ..... an alleged infringement of the trade mark of the plaintiff in relation to cement concrete pipes manufactured and sold by the plaintiff and of the patent registered in relation to the said cement concrete pipes. 2. the plaintiff's case in brief is that it is a long standing manufacturer .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 04 1963 (HC)

Sheik HussaIn and Sons Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1964AP36

..... ). that case was decided by the judicial committee of the privy council as far back as 1886. the suit was for damages and an injunction for infringment of a patent under the patents and designs act. such a suit can only be brought in a district court but it was brought in the court of the subordinate judge, who had no jurisdiction ..... conflict of judicial opinion, as to whether the grant of the writ was discretionary or not, the authorities seem unanimous in deciding that, where the want of jurisdiction is patent, the grant of the writ of prohibition is of course.'20. the principle has been succinctly stated in halsbury's laws of england, simond's third edition volume 9, page ..... recognised a distinction between what i will call a latent want of jurisdiction, i.e., something becoming manifest in the course of the proceedings, and what i will call a patent want of jurisdiction i.e., a want of jurisdiction apparent on the face of the proceedings.while in cases of latent want of jurisdiction there has always been a great .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 10 1963 (HC)

Tirumareddi Rajarao and ors. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1965AP388

..... by the high court on 5-4-1942. this was reversed in appeal by the high court on 5-4-1944. finally, the execution petition was dismissed on a letters patent appeal on 15-3-1945. on 5-6-1946, the appellant before the supreme court brought a suit claiming a different relief which need not be set out here, in ..... may also notice another passage occurring in the same page and called in aid by the learned government pleader.'to prosecute an action for infringement of a patent 'with due diligence' (proviso to s. 32, patents , designs and trade marks act, 1883, 46 and 47 vict c. 57 ), does not necessarily require that the action should be carried on to trial.'we .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 30 1967 (HC)

irrumathirumala Nallanchakravarthi Sampathkumara Jagannatha Tiruvenkat ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1969AP303

..... of all terms which can be used, as it is indicative and descriptive of every possible interest that a person can have. it includes rights such as trade marks, copyrights, patents and personal rights, or a share-certificate capable of transfer or transmission. it is for this reason ghulam hasan, j., in dwarakadas v. sholapur spg. and wg. co., : [1954]1scr674 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 1968 (HC)

Thirmala Reddy Mahalakshmamma Vs. Mulkluri Murlidahar Rao and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1970AP194

..... transfer merely because ther is a dispute regarding jurisdiction. in narain das v. khunni lal, (air 1934 all 569), iqbal ahmad, j., held tht court toentertain a suit is not patent or is ot admitted, the power of the high court to trnsfer a sut is untrammelled by any conditins and it si not necessary for the court before making an ..... a proper judicial process. ths case is really of no assistance because it was a case where the lack of jurisdiction of the subordinate judge to entertain the suit was patent and admitted and the order of transfer was itself made to get ever the plea of jurisdiction.6. in (1881) ilr 6 cal 30, an appeal was filed inadvertently in ..... a suit in the corut of a subordinate judge for damages for an alleged infringment of certain exclusive rights secured to him by three indian kpatents. s. 22 of the patents act expressly provided that such a sut could be laid only in the court of the district judge. the defendant filed a written statement objecting to the jurisdiction of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 1971 (HC)

Hylam Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1973]87ITR310(AP)

..... the supreme court held that:' the assessee did not, under the agreement, become entitled exclusively even for the period of the agreement, to the patents and trade marks of the swiss company ; it had merely access to the technical knowledge and experience in the pharmaceutical field which the swiss company ..... to maintain and keep on foot the aforesaid indian letter patents.19. it is under the terms of the above agreement that the assessee-company made various payments to the english company in the assessment ..... (5), the assessee-company was put under an obligation to use on the products and the invoices relating thereto the words ' manufactured under indian patent nos. 57094, 57095 and 57459 '. under clause (6) of the agreement, the assessee-company agreed to pay recurrent fees that may be necessary ..... company. the purpose for which the agreement dated december 7, 1959, was executed was that the assessee-company required a licence under the indian letter patent nos. 57094, 57095 and 57459, of which the english company was the proprietor, in order to produce copper-clad laminates, and pursuant to clause ..... laminated product. at the expiry of the period fixed in the agreement, the information that the assessee-company had acquired in respect of the patented processes under the terms of the agreement, was not returnable to the english company. whether the payment is made once for all, or periodically .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1972 (HC)

Pendela Narasimham and anr. Vs. Pendela Venkata Narasimham and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1973AP162

..... cases do not help the respondents.21. we, therefore, overrule the preliminary objection and held that defendants 1 and 2 are competent to file this letters patents appeals, and this appeal is entertainable.22. we will next take up the contention of appellants' counsel on merits. the learned counsel contended that a ..... was reversed by the appellate court, any of the parties to the appeal, under order xli, rule 4 of the civil procedure code, could file a letters patent appeal against the appellate court's decree.14. if a debt contracted by a 'karta' of a joint family is not for a legal necessity ..... no. 4 alone had filed an appeal to this court against the whole decree, and defendants 1 and 2, the appellants in this letters patent appeal, were also party-respondents in the appeal before our learned brother. the learned single judge reversed the finding of the trial court and held ..... exonerated defendant no. 4 from his liability. to pay the detb.7. the correctness of the judgment of our learned brother is challenged in this letters patent appeal before us, by defendants 1 and 2.8. the counsel for the respondents- plaintiffs raised a preliminary objection that the appeal is not maintainable, ..... from the liability under the mortgage and substituted plaint b schedule property as security for a schedule property.2. the material facts leading to this letters patent appeal may briefly be stated; defendant no. 1 is the father of defendants 2 and 3 and 'karta' of the joint family comprising of himself .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 1972 (HC)

Ampro Food Products Vs. Ashoka Biscuit Works and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1973AP17

..... did not exclude such a defence. the absence of an express provision, such as the one contained in section 29 (2) in regard to a patent, in the case of a design, it, in my view, a ground for coming to the conclusion that such a defence is precluded in a suit based on the infringement ..... registered design was a new or original design. when the learned judge's attention was drawn to the fact that the case of patents it was expressly provided by section 29(2) of the patents and designs act, 1911 that every ground on which a patent might be revoked shall be available by way of defence to a suit for infringement of a ..... patent and that there was no similar provision in the case of a design the learned judge observed that the absence of a similar provision in the case of a design .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 1973 (HC)

M. Gangappa Vs. the Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1975AP138

..... such a rule either on the ground that it is not within the power or that it is repugnant to the parent act.102. in rex v. comptroller general of patents: bayer products ltd., ex pane. (1943) 2 kb 306 at p. 311, scott, l. j., said '..... the effect of the words 'asappear to him to be necessary or expedient' is .....

Tag this Judgment!


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