Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Year: 1958 Page 1 of about 384 results (0.009 seconds)

Feb 28 1958 (HC)

Blackwood and Sons Ltd. and ors. Vs. A.N. Parasuraman and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-28-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Mad410

..... am unable to conceive of the possibility of such a course without attributing a local situation to that right.62. earlier i have set out instances of intangible rights like patents and trade marks as affording an analogy for reaching a decision in relation to copyright. the basis of the rule in those cases is to be found in the two ..... a debt be stipulated it will be there situate, the general rule notwithstanding. a cause of action in contract or tort is situate where action may be brought upon it. patents and trade marks are situate where they can be transferred on the same principle as shares in companies......the inference, however, must not be rawn that because no personal property ..... principle which fixes 'situs' with reference to the jurisdiction where the right could be enforced, and (3) lastly the analogy furnished by comparable intangible rights such as patents and trade marks (as to patents see 1932 ac 23858. if the intangible right whose situs has to be determined is a statutory right and owes its existence to a statute enacted by a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 1958 (FN)

Northern Pacific R. Co. Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-10-1958

..... be likely to result in economic detriment to vendees or lessees, and such uniqueness of the tying product as to suggest comparison with a monopoly by patent. but i venture to predict that the language of the court, taken in conjunction with its approval of the summary disposition of this case, will ..... by adopting the government's argument that this case should be brought within international salt by analogy of the ownership of land to that of a patent, so that the particular tract of land involved in each purchase or lease itself constitutes the relevant market. the record in any event is ..... to the need for clear proof on this issue. in fact, that case considered that, in international salt, the required element of proof was supplied by the patents themselves, which "conferred monopolistic, albeit lawful, market control" over the tying product, 345 u.s. at 345 u. s. 608 , as indeed the court ..... the court placed no reliance on the fact that a patent was involved, nor did it give the slightest intimation that the outcome would have been any different if that had not been the case. if anything ..... . s. 293 , 337 u. s. 305 . the defendant attempts to evade the force of international salt on the ground that the tying product there was patented, while here it is not. but we do not believe this distinction has, or should have, any significance. in arriving at its decision in international salt, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 04 1958 (HC)

V.B. Mohammed Ibrahim Vs. Alfred Schafraneck and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-04-1958

Reported in : AIR1960Kant173; AIR1960Mys173

..... , however, admitted that, on 4-3-46, defendants 1 and 2 alone applied for registering their names as inventors and for the grant of a patent in their favour. this application was finally sealed on 6-2-47, the day next after the release deed was passed. in this connection, the plaintiff ..... bring any suit for infringement of patent rights regarding the patent to question.'under these circumstance we have to hold that the plaintiff could not institute this suit under the provisions of section 29 of the ..... although the petitioner had assigned his rights to that plaintiff, the latter had not registered the assignment under the provisions of section 63 of the indian patents and designs act. therefore he was not the patentee within the meaning of the act (section 2, sub-section 12) and had no right to ..... by reason of the joint acquisition, the plaintiff has derived a beneficial interest in the plaintiff has derived a beneficial interest in the right of a patent. whether there is evidence to show that he has acquired this right or not, is a question of fact which will be discussed later.assuming ..... 1 to 3 from manufacturing or marketing flower design chair seats. these reliefs are apparently claimed on the ground that the plaintiff has the patent rights under the patents and designs act. but it is a curious suit in that the registered patentees are admittedly defendants 1 and 2 and, on their assignment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 23 1958 (HC)

Raj Kishan JaIn Vs. Tulsi Dass Etc.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-23-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H291

..... judge) under the delhi rent control act. on this ground also the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner fails. it follows that no letters patent appeal under clause 10 is competent against the judgment of a single judge of this court when an order has been passed under. article 227 of ..... been exercised in circumstances not covered by section 107 of the 1915 act. in this view of the matter it is obvious that no letters patent appeal lies from an order made in the exercise of power of superintendence whether in consonance with the provisions of section 107; or in accordance ..... on or connected with the setting up of the two dominions. neither this act nor the adaptation order specifically dealt with clause 10 of the letters patent. subject to changes introduced by the independence act the government of india act 1935 continued in force. then on 26th of january, 1950, our presentconstitution ..... of the constitution in exercise of power of superintendence was not appealable. the learned counsel for the appellant in reply has urged that a letters patent appeal against the order under article 227 is competent and in any case the judgment in question was made in substance under article 226 of ..... this petition as one under article 227 of the constitution and dismissed it. the landlord has filed this appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent.2. the learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection to this appeal and that is that the order under appeal being one .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 1958 (HC)

Major General Shanta Shamsher Jung Bahadur Rana Vs. Kamani Brothers Pr ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-06-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Bom201; (1958)60BOMLR1024; [1959]29CompCas501(Bom)

..... . the sum total of man's personal rights, on the other hand, constitutes his status or personal condition, as opposed to his estate. if he owns land, or chattels, or patent rights, or the goodwill of a business, or shares in a company or if debts are owning to him, all these rights pertain to his estate. but if he is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 1958 (HC)

Tarsem Singh Major and ors. Vs. Sm. Jagindro and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-06-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H88

a.n. bhandari, c.j. 1. this petition raises the question whether the learned district judge was justified in dismissing an application for the amendment of a decree.2. the allotment of a plot of land in favour of one shrimati jogindro, a displaced person from the west punjab, was cancelled by the custodian of evacuee property on the ground that the allottee had left no land in pakistan on the basis of which the allotment could have been made.jogindro challenged the correctness of this decision by means of an action in a court of law & claimed relief on two grounds, namely (1) that she was aw owner of a plot of land situate in pakistan, and (2) that the allotment was cancelled without her being afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard. the trial court found in favour of the plaintiff and granted her the decree prayed for. the learned district judge, mr. i. n. kapur, to whom an appeal was preferred refrained from deciding whether the land in pakistan belonged to the plaintiff or to the defendants, for this question had to be decided by the custodian of evacuee property and not by a civil court.he held, however, that as no notice was served on the plaintiff before the order of cancellation was made, the order of cancellation could not be supported. in this view of the case he upheld the order of the trial court and dismissed the appeal. in paragraph 4 of his order he observed as follows :'now the learned senior subordinate judge held that no notice was served on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 07 1958 (HC)

Nihal Chand Vs. Shiv NaraIn and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-07-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H263

meher singh, j. 1. this is a second appeal by nihal chand plaintiff from the judgment and decree, dated 30-4-1953 of the first additional district judge of delhi varying, in certain respect only, the decree, dated 26-11-1951, of the first class subordinate judge of delhi, whereby the suit of the plaintiff against shiv narain, rama nand and sadda ram, defendants, sons of giani ram, giano, defendant, widow of giani ram, and one phool wati, was dismissed in so far as the plaintiff claimed a decree for eviction of the defendants from the premises in suit,but was decreed for an amount of rs. 197/1/- asrent due. special costs in the amount of rs. 80/- were awarded against shiv narain, ram nand and giano defendants. in appeal, the first appellate court only varied the decree of the trial court in the matter of costs, leaving the parties to their own costs before it as also in the trial court.2. the premises were taken on lease by giani ram deceased from the plaintiff on 16-3-1941, at a rental of rs. 5/- per mensem. it appears that the premises were under construction and on completion of the same on 25-7-1941, giani ram deceased went in possession of the same. soon after there was litigation between them on the question of the rent of the premises, which was ultimately fixed by decree of the court at rs. 5/- per mensem. between 1941 and 1946 there were six suits brought by the plaintiff against giani ram deceased either claiming increase of rent or eviction or both on one or more .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1958 (HC)

F. Nanak Chand Ramkishan Das and ors. Vs. Lal Chand Ganeshi Lal and or ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-08-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H222

k.l. gosain, j.1. this second appeal is directed against the appellate decree of shri maharaj kishore, district judge, hissar, confirming the decree of shri p.k. thukral, sub-judge 1st class, gur-gaon, by which the suit of the plaintin-appellants was dismissed on 18-5-1949.2. lal chand and his sons prabhu dayal and chuni lal constituted a joint hindu family and carried on their business under the name and style of messrs. lal chand prabhu dayal at hodel, tehsil palwal. on 30-5-1943 prabhu dayal acting as karta & manager of the family gave a hundi to the plaintiff-firm nanak chand bam kishan of hodel for a sum of rs. 5,894/4/- drawn on messrs: manohar lal ram parshad of hailey mandl, pataudi, and obtained from the plaintiffs a sum of rs. 5,879/4/-, i.e., the amount covered by the hundi less commission at the rate of -/4/- per cent.as collateral security for the amount of the hundi the defendants also handed over to the plaintiffs one railway receipt under which 154 bags of matra and 50 bags of arhar had been booked. the hundi bore an endorsement on the back of it that the amount covered by the hundi may be paid on receipt of the railway receipt. the said hundi was presented to messrs. manohar lal ram parshad through the central bank of india for acceptance and payment, but on 2-9-1943 the said firm dishonoured it.the plaintiffs received information regarding this fact on 8-9-1943 and obtained delivery of the goods covered by the railway receipt on 12-9-1943. on 1-10-1943 the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1958 (HC)

Dominion of India Vs. the Delhi Registered Stock Holders (iron and Ste ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-08-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H270

d. falshaw, j. 1. this is an appeal by the union of india against part of a decree which has been passed in favour of the respondent the delhi registered slock holders (iron and steel) association limited.2. the suit was instituted in june, 1949 against the government through the general managers of the bengal nagpur railway and east indian railway and the chief administrative officer, east punjab railway, claiming rs. 11,995/8/- on the allegation that a consignment consisting of 218 bundles of galvanised corrugated iron sheets had been despatched by rail by the tata iron and steel company limited from tata nagar to the plaintiff association at delhi, and that no portion of the consignment had been delivered. the suit was instituted after consolidated notices dated the 15th of january, 1949 had been served on the appropriate officers of the three railways concerned and the secretary to the ministry of transport, government of india, in which the full value of the consignment together with incidental expenses and interest was claimed and had failed to elicit any satisfaction.3. after the suit had been dismissed in default and restored a written statement was filed on 30th of march, 1950 on behalf of the east punjab railway in which it was stated that the consignment had remained untraced because the wagon arrived without labels, but the contents of the wagon had been unloaded on the 6th of july, 1948 at shakur basti, where they were now available for delivery. under orders of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1958 (HC)

Karnail Singh S/O Chanan Singh Vs. State

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-08-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H316; 1958CriLJ1094

orderr.p. khosla, j.1. this is a revision petition by kar-naii singh against his conviction for an offence under section 42 punishable under section 123 of the indian motor vehicles act and for contravention of the provisions of rule 528 (1) of the motor vehicles rules 1940 punishable under section 112 of the indian motor vehicles act. the petitioner was ordered to pay a fine of rs. 51/- for contravening the provisions of section 42 of the said act and a further fine of rs. 10/- for contravening the provisions of rule 528 (1) of the motor vehicles rules, 1940.2. the petitioner was a driver in the employment of the simla hills transport company, delhi. on 4-3-1956, he was found driving taxi car no. dlz-26 belonging to the said firm at hodal in district gurgaon. the permit for plying this car was restricted to delhi state territory only. the petitioner could not produce the first-aid box also at the time when he was apprehended at hode],3. the petitioner was prosecuted for plying car in an area not covered by the permit and for contravening the rules under the motor vehicles act for non-production of the first-aid box.4. the facts of this case are not in dispute. an attempt at the trial wag made to prove that the first aid box was in the car and thus the petitioner was not within the mischief of rule 5.28 (1) of the motor vehicles rules, 1940. courts below-found against the petitioner on this aspect. this matter is not even agitated before me now in revision. i accordingly hold .....

Tag this Judgment!


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