Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Year: 1958 Page 9 of about 384 results (0.009 seconds)

Mar 10 1958 (HC)

Katihar Jute Mills Ltd. Vs. Shri Lachminarayan Jute Manufacturing Co. ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Mar-10-1958

Reported in : AIR1958Cal501

..... at page 44 of the paper-book. such were the nature and the number of the points raised by these statements and so multitudinous were the documents, many of them patently irrelevant, of which production was called for that the method which the respondent chose to adopt for conducting its defence can only he called vexatious. it had informed the appellant .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 1958 (HC)

Leo Roy Frey Vs. R. Prasad and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-10-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H377; 1958CriLJ1225

ordera.n. bhandari, c.j. 1. this petition under section 3 of the contempt of courts act raises the question whether the respondents have published matter which is intended or reasonably calculated to prejudice the fair trial of a criminal case.2. the petitioner in this case is one mr. leo roy frey, an american stock broker, while the respondents are the editor, printer and publisher of the statesman and the editor, printer and publisher of the tribune.3. on 23-6-1957 mr. dana, a citizen of cuba and mr. frey, a citizen of california, who were travelling to pakistan in a luxury american car, presented themselves at the attari road land customs station for completing the customs formalities. they filled in the baggage declaration forms which were handed over to them. mr. frey's declaration form was found to be correct in all particulars except only that he had omitted to declare a. 28 revolver which was recovered from his possession.mr. dana's form was not found to be correct, for a search of the car in which these two passengers were travelling revealed the presence of a secret chamber above the petrol tank which contained indian currency of the value of rs. 8,50,000/- and united states currency of the value of 10,000 dollars. as neither of the two passengers could produce the necessary permission from the reserve bank of india for the export of so large a sum of money from the country, the customs officials took the currency as well as the pistol and the cartridges into .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 1958 (HC)

Partap Singh Kairon Vs. Gurmej Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-10-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H409

a.n. bhandari, c.j.1. this petition under article 227 of the constitution raises the question whether an election tribunal is justified in declining to determine certain preliminary questions of law under the provisions of order 14 rule 2 of the code of civil procedure which if decided in favour of the party objecting would dispense with any further trial or at any rate with the trial of some substantial issue in the case.2. partap singh kairon, chief minister of the punjab, was elected a member of the punjab legislative assembly from the sarhali constituency of the amritsar district defeating his rival candidate s. gurmej singh by a majority of over 20,000 votes.3. on 11-4-1957 s. gurmej singh presented an election petition in which he challenged the election of s. partap singh on a number of grounds, among others, being (1) that the nomination paper filed by one santa singh was improperly rejected by the returning officer, and (2) that s. partap singh had obtained the assistance of lambardars for the furtherance of the prospects of his election.4. s. partap singh controverted those allegations and prayed that the election petition be rejected as the nomination paper of santa singh was not improperly rejected and as the office of lambardar is not covered by the provisions of section 123(7) of the representation of the people act, 1951.5. in view of the pleadings of the parties the election tribunal framed a number of issues, including issues nos. 3 and 8 which were in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 1958 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi), Owing the Southern Rly. by Its General Manager V ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-11-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Mad117; (1958)IIMLJ419

..... judges who held that an order of transfer of a suit from a subordinate court to this court was a judgment within the meaning of clause 15 of the letters patent. there are also other decisions which proceed on similar reasoning to which reference need not be made.the supreme court, however, in asrumati debi v. rupendra deb, ..... alagappa chettiar, ilr mad 1, and in subsequent decisions to find out whether an order falls within the category of a judgment under clause 15 of the letters patent.in krishna reddi v. thanikachala mudalia, ilr (1924) mad 136: air 1924 mad 90, more or less the same kind of reasoning was adopted by the learned ..... court sitting on the original side, allowing or refusing to allow a plaintiff to sue as a pauper is a judgment under clause 15 of the letters patent and is appealable.the reasoning of the learned judges was that such an order was not an interlocutory one made in the exercise of a discretionary power. ..... must be dismissed on the short ground that it is not maintainable. the order under appeal is not a judgment, within the meaning of clause 15 of the letters patent to permit this appeal. learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the ruling in baba sah v. purushotama sah, ilr (1925) mad 700 : air 1925 mad 167 ..... order inquestion docs not fulfil either of the tests, we musthold that it is not a judgment within the meaningof clause 15 of the letters patent. it follows that thisappeal under that clause is not sustainable and istherefore dismissed with costs. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 1958 (SC)

M.P.V. Sundararamier and Co. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-11-1958

Reported in : AIR1958SC468; (1958)IMLJ179(SC); [1958]1SCR1422; [1958]9STC298(SC)

venkatarama aiyar, j.1. the petitioners are dealers carrying on business in the city of madras inthe sale and purchase of yarn, and they have filed the present applicationsunder art. 32 of the constitution for the issue of a writ of prohibition orother appropriate writ restraining the state of andhra from taking proceedingsfor imposing tax on certain sales effected by them in favour of merchants whoare residing or carrying on business in what is now the state of andhrapradesh, on the ground, inter alia, that the said sales were made in the courseof inter-state trade, and that no tax could be levied on them by reason of theprohibition contained in art. 286(2) of the constitution. 2. the course of dealings between the parties resulting in the above saleshas been set out in para. 5 in petition no. 220 of 1955. it is therein statedthat the dealers in andhra would place orders for the purchase of yarn with thepetitioners in madras, that the contracts would be concluded at madras, that thegoods would be delivered ex-godown at madras and would thereafter be despatchedto the purchasers either by lorries or by rail as might be directed by them,that when the goods were sent by rail, the railway receipts would be takeneither in the name of the consignees, and sent to them by post or in the nameof the consignor and endorsed to the purchasers and delivered to them in madrasor sent to them by post endorsed in favour of a bank and the purchasers wouldtake delivery of those receipts after .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1958 (HC)

Hoshiar Singh S/O Jug Lal Vs. the State

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-17-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H312; 1958CriLJ1093

..... provided by this code or by any other law for the time being in force or, in the case of a high court established by royal charter, by the letters patent of such high court, no court, when it has signed its judgment, shall alter or review the same, except to correct a clerical error.'the learned judge did not consider .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1958 (HC)

Ramanuja Naicker and ors. Vs. Seethalakshmi Ammal Alias Sellathayee an ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-18-1958

Reported in : (1958)2MLJ512

..... necessary to file a suit to enforce the charge declared by the decree he allowed the appeal before him and set aside the order of the court below. the letters patent appeal before us is against the order of ramaswami, j.4. mr. annaswami ayyar, learned counsel for the appellants, contended that the decree as it now stands is not executable .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1958 (HC)

Administrator General of West Bengal Vs. Basudeb Mukherjee

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Mar-18-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Cal174

..... the course of justice by writing to the trial judge or by writing to the chief justice requesting him to speak to the trial judge in the matter are so patent that i am astonished to see that a person advanced in years as barindra kumar chose is and holding an important and responsible position as the editor of a daily .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1958 (HC)

Kishori Lal Batra Vs. the Punjab State and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-18-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H402

s. b. capoor j. 1. this is a plaintiffs appeal from the judgment and decree of the senior subordinate judge, rohtak, dismissing his suit with costs.2. the facts material for the decision of this appeal are that the punjab government by its notification, exhibit p. w. 2/5, dated 20-3-1948, extended the provisions of the punjab municipal (executive officer) act, 1931, to the municipality of rohtak, which was a municipality of the second class as constituted under the punjab municipal act, 1911. under section 3 of the punjab municipal (executive officer) act, 1931, hereinafter referred to as the act, it was therefore incumbent on the committee to appoint within three months from the date of the notification a person with the approval of the state government as executive officer for a renewable period of five years. the meeting for the purpose of appointing an executive officer had to be especially convened and the resolution of appointment had to be passed by not less than five-eighths of the total number of members constituting the committee for the time being.the municipal committee, rohtak, made a recommendation for the appointment of l. sant lal as executive officer of the committee (vide exhibit d. 11) but that recommendation was not accepted by government as the resolution had not been passed with a requisite five-eighths majority, vide punjab government letter, exhibit d. 12, dated 10-9-1948, by which the committee was given an extension of one month within which it may .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1958 (HC)

Satya Deo Gupta Vs. Amrit Dhara Pharmacy

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-19-1958

Reported in : AIR1958All823

..... . it may be noted here that in this case, we are not concerned with the composition of the medicine produced. that would be a matter under the patent law. if a particular prescription is patented, any other firm may not produce a medi-cine with the same prescription. but here we haveonly to see whether the goods produced by the applicant shri .....

Tag this Judgment!


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