Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Court: gujarat Year: 2002 Page 6 of about 76 results (0.006 seconds)

Sep 19 2002 (HC)

Chemox Laboratories Ltd. and anr. Vs. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilise ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-19-2002

Reported in : III(2003)BC446; (2003)1GLR424

..... the accusedcan be quashed only in rare cases, such as, where the complaint and the statementrecorded thereunder make out absolutely no case against the accused or wherethe allegations are so patently absurd and inherently improbable that no prudentperson can find sufficient ground for proceeding or where the issuance of processis capricious and arbitrary, or where the complaint suffers from fundamentallegal detects .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 21 2002 (HC)

State of Gujarat Vs. Nirmalaben Waghela, President

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-21-2002

Reported in : (2003)4GLR320

order1. the present petition is preferred by the petitioner against the show cause notice dtd. 6.6.2002, issued by the state government under sec. 263(1) for the dissolution of the porbandar municipality.2. heard mr.nanavaty, sr. counsel for the petitioner with mr.a.r.thakkar, for the petitioner.3. mr.nanavati for the petitioner submitted that, the state government has no authority to give direction to the president of the municipality, to convene the general board meeting and he further contended that, the ground mentioned in the show cause notice cannot be said to be valid ground in the eyes of law for the purpose of attracting the powers under sec. 263 of the act.4. mr.nanavaty also submitted that, out of the political mala fide, with a view to see that, the elected board which is having majority, of opposite political party to the state level, is removed, the action is taken.5. mr.nanavati also submitted that, the details of the allegations are not mentioned and therefore, he submitted that, the show cause notice should be quashed and set aside since, it is without any authority.6. considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case, i am of the view that, it is not necessary for this court to examine the question raised by the petitioner at this stage, more particularly, because, the proceedings are at show cause notice stage and the state has yet to take the final decision in the matter.7. it may be noted that, mr.nanavati during the course of hearing, has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 2002 (HC)

Vicharti and Vimukt Jati Mahasangh and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and o ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-24-2002

Reported in : (2002)2GLR954

..... , and if yes, what should be the interim relief? 3. we have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned a.g.p., on this point. in fact, letters patent appeal is circumscribed only challenging the interim order of the learned single judge. ordinarily, the exercise of discretion by the learned single judge by invoking the provisions of article 226 ..... . service of notice is waived by learned a.g.p., ms. harsha devani for the respondents. upon joint request and in view of the urgency in the matter, the letters patent appeal is taken up for final hearing today itself. 2. the short question which has emerged for consideration in this appeal under clause 15 of the letters ..... patent appeal challenging the order of the learned single judge, dated 4-9-2002, recorded in special civil application no. 8509 of 2002, is as to whether the refusal of interim .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 2002 (HC)

Aventis Pasteur S.A. Vs. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-24-2002

Reported in : 2003(2)ARBLR259(Gujarat)

..... and the proper course is to approach the single judge seeking appropriate further action and not to file appeals against interim orders. this was under clause 15 of the letters patent appeal. he has also relied on another judgment of the madras high court reported in 1998(1) madras law weekly 411. he submitted that even assuming that the appeal is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 2002 (HC)

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kokilaben Wd/O. Naginbhai Rameshchandr ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-25-2002

Reported in : II(2003)ACC12; 2004ACJ123; (2003)2GLR1479

..... for hire or reward by the statute is limited to rs. 10,000/- per individual passenger, and consequently, the award of the tribunal which extends to rs. 16,000/- is patently erroneous.17. the division bench, in revaben's case (supra), after considering the decision of five judges' bench of this court in first appeal nos. 1439, 1440 and 1441 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 2002 (HC)

Food Corporation of India Employees' Association Vs. Food Corporation ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Sep-30-2002

Reported in : (2003)2GLR1013

..... the norm of normal losses at 0.5%. 4. aggrieved by the aforesaid order insofar as the petitioner-union's challenges were negatived at the threshold, the petitioner preferred letters patent appeal no. 199 of 2002. by order dated 25-6-2002, the division bench left it open to the petitioner to challenge the above circular no. 3, but on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 2002 (HC)

Gujarat Mazdoor Sabha Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-08-2002

Reported in : (2003)1GLR158; (2003)ILLJ1066Guj

..... 1998 before this court challenging the amended notification, but the same was dismissed by the learned single judge on 11th september, 1998, against which letters patent appeal no. 1285 of 1998 is pending. however, no interim relief staying the operations was granted by this court in appeal. the history of ..... issued under section 10(1) of the act by the state government dated 3-6-1998 is directly under challenge in the aforesaid letters patent appeals pending before the division bench of this court. i am informed that before the learned single judges this challenge was mainly based on ..... to the validity of the notifications issued by the state government was pending final disposal before the division bench of this court in the letters patent appeals without approaching this court and seeking its permission.(iv) in case it is held that central government is not the 'appropriate government, qua ..... regard to the validity of the notifications issued by the state government is still not finally decided since it is the subject-matter of letters patent appeals pending before the division bench of this court, and therefore, it cannot be said that for iffco in the operations of stacking and ..... dismissed by this court [coram : h.l. gokhale, j.] by judgment dated 11th september, 1998. against the said judgment, iffco has preferred letters patent appeal no. 1281 of 1998 which is pending before the division bench for disposal. however, no interim relief has been granted in the same. similarly, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 2002 (HC)

Essar Steel Ltd. Vs. Gramercy Emerging Market Fund

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-17-2002

Reported in : [2003]116CompCas248(Guj)

..... judge decides a controversy which affects valuable rights of one of the parties, it must be treated to be a judgment within the meaning of clause 15 of the letters patent. accordingly to the learned senior counsel, important issues came to be decided under the impugned order and therefore, the appeal would lie against it.' 8. the learned senior counsel appearing ..... the indian companies act, 1913 (which corresponded to section 483 of the said act), it was not necessary that it must satisfy the requirements of clause 15 of the letters patent, that it should a 'judgment' within the meaning of that clause. in that case, the court was concerned with the order of confirmation of sale in course of administration where .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 2002 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gujarat State Fertilizers Co. Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-19-2002

Reported in : (2003)179CTR(Guj)266; [2003]259ITR526(Guj)

..... of development rebate. section 43a(1) itself refers to section 35(1)(iv) {capital expenditure on scientific research related to the business) and section 35a (capital expenditure on acquisition of patent rights or copy- rights) which are also one time allowances. there are many other one time allowances, but none of them is specifically excluded by the legislature except the development ..... of fluctuation in the foreign exchange rate even in case of some other one time allowances like those for scientific research under section 35(1)(iv) or for acquisition of patent rights under section 35a.43. for the aforesaid reasons, we are of the view that, with respect, the division bench in the windsor foods ltd.'s case : [1999]235itr249(guj .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 2002 (HC)

Sarvagna Navinchandra Godiawala Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-24-2002

Reported in : (2003)2GLR1266

..... appellants therein unsuccessfully challenged the decision of the state government, dismissing the revision, by filing special civil application. aggrieved by the decision in the special civil application, the aforesaid letters patent appeal was filed.16. on behalf of respondent no. 3 therein, it was submitted as under :'8. on behalf of respondent no. 3, mr. a.j. patel has submitted that ..... pocketed the undue benefits pursuant to transaction of sale which is under challenge.'it is also pertinent to extract paragraphs 16 and 17 of the aforesaid judgment in the letters patent appeal :'16. mr. a.j. patel has drawn our attention to the judgment of the division bench (coram : mr. k.g. balakrishnan, c.j. & mr. justice j.n. bhatt) dated ..... 2-9-1999 in letters patent appeal no. 1153 of 1998 in special civil application no. 6265 of 1998 in the case of legal heirs of mithabhai mavjibhai v. state of gujarat. before the division bench .....

Tag this Judgment!


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