Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Court: andhra pradesh Year: 2000 Page 1 of about 51 results (0.039 seconds)

Oct 16 2000 (HC)

S. Bharat Kumar and Others Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-16-2000

Reported in : 2000(6)ALD217; 2000(6)ALT1

..... , investments, book debts, claims, receivables, deposits, capital work in progress, deferred costs, advances paid, accrued incomes and pre-paid expenses, benefits, licences, permits, consents, rights of way, authorities, registrations, liberties, patents, trademarks, design, copyrights and other intellectual property rights, privileges, liberties, easements,advantages, benefits and approvals, contract-deeds, schemes, bonds, guarantees, agreements, insurance, and other instruments and interests of whatsoever nature ..... court speaking through sudershan reddy, j in v.b.c. ferro alloy's case (supra) in the following words:'..... the tariff fixation can be declared unconstitutional only if it is patently arbitrary, irrational, discriminatory or demonstrably irrelevant. the court inexercise of its judicial review jurisdiction ought not to normally interfere so long as the exercise of the power to fix the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 2000 (HC)

Soham Modi and Another Vs. Special Court Under A.P. Land Grabbing (Pro ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-03-2000

Reported in : 2000(2)ALD468; 2000(2)ALT316

..... said error of law is apparent on the face of the record. it may also be that in some cases, the impugned error of law may not be obvious or patent on the face of the record as such and the court may need an argument to discover the said error, but there can be no doubt that what can be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2000 (HC)

i.S.N. Murthy Vs. Apstrc, Visakhapatnam and Another

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-18-2000

Reported in : 2000(5)ALD484; 2000(3)ALT508; [2000(87)FLR860]

..... . but insofar as the case on hand in concerned, the petitioner, to say the least, is guilty of wrong punching of tickets. the charge of misappropriation as such is not patent at all. taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, i set aside the impugned proceedings passed by the 2nd respondent as well as the 1st respondent and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 2000 (HC)

Gangaram Kandaram Vs. Sunder Chikha AmIn and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-03-2000

Reported in : 2000(2)ALD824; 2000(1)ALD(Cri)625; 2000(2)ALT448

..... judgment has no application to the facts of the present case.17. we accordingly, answer the second question that an appeal under clause 15 of letters patent of the court lies against the judgment in such a case.18. for the foregoing reasons, we allow the writ appeal, set aside the order of ..... proceeding cannot be said to be an order passed in exercise of the criminal jurisdiction. therefore, we hold that an appeal lies under clause 15 of letters patent.16. the learned counsel for the appellant relied upon a judgment of madras high court in re s. govindaswamy nathan, : air1955mad121 . that case arose out ..... section 107 of government of india act or in exercise of criminal jurisdiction. an appeal shall lie to the division bench under clause 15 of letters patent from the judgment of onejudge of the high court or one judge of any division bench. the appeal from judgments of single judges of the ..... the high court for quashing on relevant grounds thereafter.14. with regard to the second question as to whether the appeal under clause 15 of letters patent of the court lies against the judgment in such a case. in other words, whether the proceedings for quashing of the investigation in a criminal ..... offences as envisaged under sections 468 and 469 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973; and (ii) whether appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent of the court lies against the judgment in such a case. in other words, whether a proceeding for quashing of investigation in a criminal case under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 2000 (HC)

Bagh Lingamapalli HiG-ii Flats (SFHS) Allottee's Association, Hyd. Vs. ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-03-2000

Reported in : 2000(2)ALD743; 2000(2)ALT473

ordervaman rao, j.1. these writ appeals filed under clause 15 of the letters patent seeks to challenge the common order dated 17-4-1998 passed by the leaned single judgein writ petition nos.9869 of 1997, 25037 of 1997 and batch.2. the respondent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 2000 (HC)

Y. Sekhar Vs. Govt. of A.P. and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-08-2000

Reported in : 2001(2)ALD693

..... be modified, amended or rescinded. a policy decision taken may even be withdrawn'.14. a policy decision taken by the state may not be interfered with unless the same is patently arbitrary as held in centre for pli v. union of india, : air2001sc80 .15. it is also a well settled principle of law that in a given case, the court may .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 2000 (HC)

M. Sreeramulu Vs. Tahera Yousuf Kadri

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-16-2000

Reported in : 2000(3)ALD173; 2000(2)ALT727

..... the applicability of the act. suit was decreed for possession and mesne profits. thus the appeal was allowed.4. -, tenant impugned the judgment of the learned single judge in letter patent appeal, inter alia on the ground that the words 'with effect on and from 26th october, 1983' in the notification means the building was not exempt from the operation of ..... from the rule that plain words should be interpreted according to their plain meaning. there need be no meek and mute submission to the plainness of the language. to avoid patent injustice, anomaly or absurdity or to avoid invalidation of a law, the court would be well justified in departing from the so-called golden rule of construction so as to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 2000 (HC)

S.J. Narayana Jana Deo Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-16-2000

Reported in : 2000(2)ALD781; 2000(3)ALT87

..... of seniority subject to fitness as claimed by the petitioner in one of his representations or it may mean concessions if any, given to a scheduled tribe officer. on a patent misunderstanding of the judgment of this court in writ petition no.5306 of 1981, the government passed an order in g.o. ms. no.1583, dated 18-7-1988, that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 21 2000 (HC)

Apsrtc, Mushirabad, Hyderabad Vs. Industrial Tribunal, Hyderabad and O ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-21-2000

Reported in : 2000(3)ALD66; 2000(2)ALT762; [2000(86)FLR362]; (2000)IILLJ1134AP

..... , to refer clauses 16 and 17 of the settlement to the 1st respondent tribunal for its interpretation, does not suffer from any infirmity. the decision is neither irrational, perverse nor patently outside the pale of the power inhering in it undersection 36-a of the act. in the above premise this court is disinclined to enter upon adjudication into the other ..... parties agreed upon, by the expressed terms of the settlement. the tribunal's exercise was constitutive not interpretive.41. the award of the tribunal dated 29-3-1993 is thus patently and fundamentally beyond the pale of its jurisdiction under section 36-a of the act and is thus invalid. it is accordingly set aside.42. in the premises above, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 2000 (HC)

Patel Desai and Co., Secunderabad Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-24-2000

Reported in : 2000(3)ALD274; (2000)165CTR(AP)655; [2000]243ITR689(AP)

..... the conclusion reached by the settlement commission on the issue which is in the nature of mixed question of law and fact, can be said to be ex facie and patently untenable. it is neither a decision reached de hors the provisions of the act, nor does it transgress any provision of law. the error, if any, is only in the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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