Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Court: supreme court of india Year: 1980 Page 1 of about 67 results (0.070 seconds)

Jan 16 1980 (SC)

Dayal Saran Sanan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-16-1980

Reported in : AIR1980SC554; 1980LabIC380; (1980)3SCC25; 1980(12)LC509(SC)

..... of article 420. entailing forfeiture of his past service. it was, therefore held that the appellant was not entitled to any relief. an appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent having been summarily rejected by a division bench of the high court, the appellant has preferred this appeal by special leave of this court.2. shri r.k. garg. learned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 16 1980 (SC)

State of Maharashtra Vs. Kalu Shivram Jagtap and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-16-1980

Reported in : AIR1980SC879; 1980CriLJ570; 1980Supp(1)SCC224; 1980(12)LC632(SC)

s. murtaza fazal ali, j.1. this appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the bombay high court dated 5-4-1973.2 the respondents were convicted by the sessions judge under section 302/149 of indian penal code along with other accused persons. in appeal filed by the accused before the high court, the high court altered the conviction of the three respondents from one under section 302/149 to that under section 326/34. there were other accused persons also whose convictions were partly maintained and partly altered but we are not concerned with them because the state has filed the appeal only against respondents 1 and 2 who are accused 2 and 3 before the trial court.3. the facts of the case have been detailed in the judgment of the high court and the sessions judge and it is not necessary to repeat the same. it however appears that two months before the occurrence, there was some dispute between the parties which furnished the motive for the assault on the deceased, sadashiv. according to the prosecution accused nos. 1, 2 & 3 and others came to the place of occurrence, started abusing the deceased and respondent no. 1 opened the assault by giving a stick blow on the head of sadashiv and he was immediately followed by respondent no. 2 who struck another blow on the head of the deceased with his stick. so far as respondent no. 3 is concerned, there is no allegation that he took any part in the assault so far as the deceased is concerned. he is said to have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 1980 (SC)

Narendra Bahadur Tandon Vs. Shankar Lal (Since Deceased) by Lrs

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-25-1980

Reported in : AIR1980SC575; [1982]52CompCas62(SC); (1980)2SCC253; [1980]2SCR821; 1980(12)LC361(SC)

..... sale deed but found against the defendant on the applicability of section 53a of the transfer of property act. on appeal by the plaintiffs under clause 10 of the letters patent a division bench of the high court reversed the judgment and decree of the subordinate courts and decreed the suit. the division bench held that the voluntary liquidator had no .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1980 (SC)

Mohd. Ramzani Vs. State of Delhi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-30-1980

Reported in : AIR1980SC1341; 1980CriLJ1010; 1980Supp(1)SCC215; 1980(Supp)SCC215; 1980(12)LC541(SC)

..... information report and claimed to be an eye witness of the occurrence, was not a reliable witness. besides being the brother of the deceased, he had the audacity to tell patent lies on material points. in this case, it may be noted that both sides had received injuries. mohd. shafi, the acquitted co-accused, the father of mohd. ramzani appellant, had .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 1980 (SC)

Kusho Mahton and anr. Vs. State of Bihar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-07-1980

Reported in : AIR1980SC788; 1980CriLJ313; 1980Supp(1)SCC344

r.s. sarkaria, j.1. after hearing counsel for the parties, we are of opinion that the appellants have been rightly convicted under section 395, indian penal code, because while carrying away the stolen property they exploded cracker to frighten the inmates of the house who wanted to pursue them. all the appellants are young men and it is stated that they have already served a sentence of about one and half years. there was no attempt to cause injury to any of the inmates of the house or other persons at the time of the commission of the offence or even thereafter. taking into consideration all the circumstances of the case we are of opinion that the ends of justice will be served if the sentence is reduced to imprisonment already undergone. subject to this reduction in the sentence the appeal is dismissed. the bail bonds are discharged.

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1980 (SC)

Rallis India Ltd. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-12-1980

Reported in : AIR1980SC749; (1980)2SCC315; [1980]2SCR1028; [1980]45STC456a(SC); 1980(12)LC397(SC)

..... 50 s.t.c. 176 and daita suryanarayana and co. v. state of andhra pradesh 39 s.t.c. 500 that the exemption granted by the c.t.o. was 'patently wrong'. the high court however granted a certificate declaring the case to be a fit one for appeal to the supreme court under article 133(1)(c) of the constitution .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 21 1980 (SC)

Babu Rao Patel Vs. State (Delhi Administration)

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-21-1980

Reported in : AIR1980SC763; 1980CriLJ529; (1980)2SCC402; [1980]2SCR1082

..... appeals by special leave of this court.2. shri a.k. sen, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that if the articles were read as a whole it would be patent that the article 'a tale of two communalisms' was no more than a political thesis and t be second article 'lingering disgrace of history' was no more than, a protest .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 1980 (SC)

Sunil Kumar Banerjee Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-26-1980

Reported in : AIR1980SC1170; 1980LabIC654; (1980)3SCC304; [1980]3SCR179; 1980(12)LC479(SC)

..... the appellant could be imposed in respect of charge no. 4 to the extent to which, it was proved. he, therefore, dismissed the writ petition. on appeal under the letters patent a division bench of the calcutta high court came to the conclusion that charge no. 5 was proved, charge no. 1 was proved but was a technical irregularity and charge .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 1980 (SC)

Shri. Subhas Chandra Chetia Vs. Assam Board of Revenue and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-27-1980

Reported in : (1980)3SCC234; 1980(12)LC683(SC)

r.s. sarkaria, j.1. s.l.p. granted.2. this appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment, dated august 31, 1979, of the gauhati high court.3. the facts stated in the petition and reiterated at the bar are that in pursuance of a sale notice, dated april 6, 1979, issued by a sub-divisional officer, sibsagarm including the amgurri country spirit, the appellant submitted a tender in the prescribed form for taking settlement of the shop. the sub-divisional officer (the primary authority on the advice of the advisory committee, settled the shop with the appellant by an order, dated april 28, 1979, for the period from june 1, 1979 to march 31, 1980.4. in the tender submitted to the primary authority, the petitioner had given these details of his financial sources:(1) my brother, shri puspa chetia is giving me rs. 10,346.52' (in support of this assertion he attached an affidavit of his brother with the tender.(2) 'sibnagar district cooperative bank ltd., has assured me to accommodate loan. bank assurance certificate is attached with the tender.5. in the course of the enquiry, the excise inspector on april 22, 1979 examined the pass books of the appellant's brother, puspa chetia, and found that he had then a total credit balance of rs. 10,346.52 in two accounts, namely, rs. 7334.36 in the sibasagar central cooperative bank and rs. 3012.16 in the united bank of india, sibasagar. this apart, the appellant had rs. 1200/- ad cash in hand which was paid by his brother. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 1980 (SC)

Himalaya Tiles and Marble (P) Ltd. Vs. Francis Victor Coutinho (dead) ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-28-1980

Reported in : AIR1980SC1118; (1980)3SCC223; [1980]3SCR235; 1980(12)LC457(SC)

..... first deal with the contention of dr. chitale that the high court was wrong in holding that the company had no locus standi to file an appeal before the letters patent bench. learned counsel submitted that the definition of 'a person interested' in section 18 is an inclusive one and is wide enough to include the appellant for whose benefit the ..... division bench of the high court was wrong in holding that the appellant was not a person interested and therefore had no locus to file an appeal before the letters patent bench. secondly, it was argued that in view of the various amendments in the act, particularly in sections 40 and 41, it could not be said that the acquisition under ..... with the single judge who allowed the writ petition and quashed the land acquisition proceedings alongwith the notifications mentioned above.4. thereafter, the appellant filed an appeal before the letters patent bench which confirmed the view taken by the single judge and dismissed the appeal mainly on the ground that the appellant had no locus standi to file the appeal before ..... s. murtaza fazal ali j.1. this appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment dated november 3, 1970 of the bombay high court dismissing the letters patent appeal filed by the appellant against a decision of a single judge allowing a writ petition filed by the first respondent.2. the facts of the case lie within a .....

Tag this Judgment!


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