Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Year: 1958 Page 6 of about 384 results (0.008 seconds)

Feb 24 1958 (HC)

National Textiles Vs. Premraj Ganpatraj

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-24-1958

Reported in : AIR1958Cal284,62CWN418

..... this appeal. what we have to consider here, however, is whether the order of the learned judge amounts to a judgment within the meaning of clause 15 of the letters patent. mr. mitra contended that even clause 15 could be of no assistance to the appellant, because by the order no question touching the merits of the controversy between the parties .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 1958 (HC)

Ram Gopal Vs. Banta Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-25-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H384

..... the case, there will be no order as to costs in this court.8. i certify that it is a fit case for appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent. i grant the necessary leave to do so.

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 1958 (HC)

B.N. Elias and Co. Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-25-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Cal247

..... that the plaint as framed does not show that the court has jurisdiction to try this suit. the plaintiff has not obtained any leave under clause 12 of the letters patent. the plaintiff does not plead that the whole cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this court. as a matter of fact the plaint nowhere pleads that any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 1958 (HC)

Sampat Kumar and ors. Vs. Nathu Ram Dhuta Ram

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-25-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H326

a.n. grover, j.1. the question involved in this appeal is whether the house which was got attached by the decree-holder was exempt from attachment. there is no dispute that the house in question is the residential house of the judgment-debtor, it, however, stands mortgaged with another creditor by the name of girja mal, and the question is whether in view of the provisions of section 34 (ccc) of the patiala relief of indebtedness act, 1999 bk., exemption can be claimed by the judgment-debtor. the aforesaid provision amended section 60 of the code of civil procedure and in sub-section (1), the following was to be inserted:* * *(ccc) one main residential house and other buildings attached to it (with the material and the sites thereof and the land immediately appurtenant thereto and necessary for their enjoyment) belonging to a judgment-debtor other than an agriculturist and occupied by him; provided that the protection afforded by this sub-section shall not extend to property which has been mortgaged.' the difficulty has arisen with regard to the true scope of the proviso to this provision. the contention which found favour with the courts below was that the mere fact that the judgment-debtor had mortgaged the house with a third party did not bring him within the mischief of the proviso and disentitle him to the protection afforded by section 60 as amended, the view obviously being that the proviso would become applicable only if the property had been mortgaged with the decree .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 1958 (HC)

Major S. Arjan Singh and anr. Vs. the State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-25-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H538

orderbishan narain, j. 1. the erstwhile pepsu state acquired certain lands measuring about 250 acres for the purposes of establishing an institute of technology at patiala. almost all the owners whose lands have been acquired have filed separate writ petitions under article 226 of the constitution in this court challenging the validity of acquisition and also challenging the validity of proceedings taken thereafter culminating into awards under section 11 of the land acquisition act. these writ petitions have been filed through different counsel end on different grounds. as every ground raised applied equally to all cases, i have decided to treat all these grounds as having been raised by all the applicants. in the circumstances it will bo convenient to decide all these petitions (civil writs nos. 476, 477, 478, 524, 560, 561, 562, 567, 601. 568, 569, 570, 571, 572, 573 615, 655, 863 and 1132 of 1957) by this judgment.2. the facts relevant for the decision of these petitions are not in dispute. the pepsu gov--ernment entered into an agreement on 16-8-1955 with the trustees of the mohini thapar charitable trust (alleged to be a public trust), to establish an, institute of engineering and technology (herein-after called the institute) in patiala with a view to encourage and promote technical education in the state. under this agreement the parties agreed to create jointly a public charitable trust for the estab-lishment of the institute within six months. it was agreed that its .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 1958 (HC)

The State Vs. Mansha Singh Bhagwant Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-27-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H233; 1958CriLJ938

..... follows :'save as otherwise provided by this code or by any other law for the time being in force or, in the case of a high court by the letters patent or other instrument constituting such high court, no court, when it has signedits judgment, shall alter or review the same except to correct a clerical error.' it would be pointless .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 1958 (HC)

Narendra Nath Dutt Vs. Jitendra Nath Dutt and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-27-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Cal62

..... contended that the order, although an order allowing an amendment of written statement, was a judgment and, therefore, an appeal from it would lie under clause 15 of the letters patent. mr. roy contended that no such question had been decided by the order appealed from in the present case and, indeed there had been no decision of anything at all ..... contention that the order, allowing the amendment in that case, was a judgment and what he said had a clear reference to the terms of clause 15 of the letters patent. when he said of the order before him that it did not either affect the rights of the other party or otherwise prejudice him, lie obviously meant that it did .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 1958 (HC)

Punjab Distilling Industries, Ltd. Vs. Industrial Tribunal and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-27-1958

Reported in : (1958)IILLJ109P& H

grover, j.1. this is a petition under article 226 of the constitution in which the question is whether the industrial tribunal can proceed to decide the dispute referred to it by the punjab government by notification dated 9 january 1957. it is alleged in the petition that respondent 3, the distillery mazdoor union, put forward several demands on 1 december 1952, and by mutual agreement an arbitration board was constituted of which the deputy commissioner, amritsar, was the chairman and pandit amar nath vidyalankar and s. joginder singh chawla were the members. this board gave an award on 4 march 1953. according to this award the minimum wages of the labour were to be increased as set out in the award and the existing facilities as already provided by the company to the workers were to continue. the wages for the strike period were to be paid at the rate of 50 per cent only of the pay to the permanent workers. the increase in wages was to be effective from 26 december 1952. all other points mentioned in the notice of the workers were dropped. on 6 november 1953, the demands were repeated by the workers and were referred by the government to the second industrial tribunal by a notification dated 25 february 1954 (reference no. 3 of 1954). during the pendency of the reference another dispute arose as to whether the wages should be paid to the workers affected by lockout in the distillery for the entire period of the lockout. this was also referred to the same tribunal by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

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!

Feb 28 1958 (HC)

Gauri Shankar Vs. Firm Dulichand Laxmi Narayan

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-28-1958

Reported in : AIR1959MP188

..... appeal under section 47 of the civil procedure code and shall dispose it of accordingly, so that the party aggrieved would have a right of appeal, under clause 10 of the letters patent, as a matter of right, on the authority of madhukar trimbaklal v. sati godawari upasani maharaj, ilr (1940) nag 141: (air 1940 nag 39) (fb).there is authority for this .....

Tag this Judgment!


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