Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Year: 1980 Page 11 of about 422 results (0.012 seconds)

Mar 19 1980 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-v Vs. Lakshmi Card Clothing Man ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-19-1980

Reported in : [1984]149ITR712(Mad)

..... the licence granted under clause 3, i. e., right to manufacture and sell the card clothing and accessories on the basis of the foreign company's designs and manufacturing methods, patented or unpatented, and for the services rendered under clause 9, an annual payment of 6,000 francs had to be paid to the foreign company. it is significant to note ..... , the foreign company gives to the assessee the sole exclusive non-transferable right to manufacture and sell card clothing and accessories in certain territories on the designs and manufacturing methods patented or unpatented. under clause 9, the foreign company for a period of ten years has to forward to the assessee-company any new data, specifications, processes, revised and additional manufacturing ..... claimed.on appeal, the aac held that the consideration for the services in the shape of technical advice and for the grant of license to exploit the foreign company's patents in india is partly for services and partly in the nature of royalty and it is, therefore, on revenue account and qualified for deduction. on further appeal, the tribunal, after ..... , the kingdom of nepal and neighboring countries of india expect europe, card clothing and accessories as specified in para. (2) on the basis of graf's designs and manufacturing methods patented or unpatented. 9. during a period of ten years from the conclusion of this agreement, graf will forward from time to time to lakshmi any new data, specifications, processes, revised .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1980 (HC)

Dhangauri Valji Bhatt Vs. District Panchayat

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Mar-19-1980

Reported in : (1981)22GLR320

..... plaintiff was entitled to be reinstated in the service, the order of backwages ought to have followed as a matter of course. the appellate judge, according to mr. hathi, was patently wrong when he held that the plaintiff was not entitled to backwages from the date of the suit till reinstatement. he invited my attention to paragraph 18 of the judgment ..... a teacher during the said period. this is the only ground on which the plaintiff was refused backwages from the date of the suit till reinstatement. the said reason is patently erroneous in law. it has been now well settled that once the order of reinstatement is granted, backwages should follow as a matter of course. in g.t. lad and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 20 1980 (HC)

Bank of Baroda Vs. Prakash Warehouse and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-20-1980

Reported in : [1981]51CompCas609(Delhi); ILR1980Delhi962

..... . 5, however, is in no manner interested or concerned with the other two accounts, and. a thereforee, his impleading defedant in so far as the suit concerned those accounts, was patently had and unwarranted. the suit on this ground is, thereforee, stated to suffer from multifariousness.(9) from the side of the plaintiff, on the other hand, it is asserted that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 21 1980 (HC)

Kasturi Lal Harkesh Kumar and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-21-1980

Reported in : ILR1980Delhi308

..... 58 on page 1314, it was held : '..........the dominant purpose of these provisions is to ensure the availability of essential commodities to the consumers at a fair price. and though patent injustice to the producer is not to be encouraged, a reasonable return on investment or a reasonable rate of profit is not the sine qua non of the validity of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 21 1980 (HC)

Prem Pal Singh and ors. Vs. Phool Singh and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-21-1980

Reported in : 1980WLN483

..... against the accused or the complaint does not disclose the essential ingredients of an offence which is alleged against the accused:(2) where the allegation made in the complaint are patently absurd and inherently improbable so that no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused;(3) where the discretion exercised by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 1980 (HC)

Raj Chopra Vs. Shanno Devi and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-26-1980

Reported in : AIR1981Delhi18; 17(1980)DLT546; 1980RLR431

..... good reasons for it. but the lt. governor by holding that he had no power to do refused to exercise his jurisdiction vested in him and thus committed an error patent on the face of record and the learned judge was right in quashing the said order. (11) as a result we find no merit in the appeal and we dismiss ..... r. sachar, j.(1) this is a letters patent appeal against the order of the learned single judge dated 31.5.1974 which he allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent no. 1 and remitted the matter back .....

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 (HC)

Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Bombay City-i Vs. N.D. Petit.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-28-1980

Reported in : [1981]128ITR650(Bom); [1981]6TAXMAN387(Bom)

..... is no doubt true that provisions have been made in the act which enable the made heir to succeed to the baronetcy. in the preamble to the act, the letters patent granted by queen victoria has been referred to. the first clause of the preamble clearly provides that during the lifetime of the first baronet, sir dinshaw maneckjee petit, he would ..... petit or sir dinshaw maneckjee petit, as the case may be, would have succeeded to and been in the enjoyment of the title of baronet conferred by the same letters patent 'in case the person so refusing or neglecting to use or discontinuing to us the said names of dinshaw maneckjee petit had departed this life.'3. sir dinshaw maneckjee petit ..... maneckjee petit as the case may be shall for the time being have succeeded to and be in the enjoyment of the title of baronet conferred by the said letters patent as aforesaid, notwithstanding any rule of law or equity to the contrary.' section 6 of the said act related to the devolution of interest where the beneficiary refuses, neglects or ..... and all other heirs made of the body of the said sir dinshaw maneckjee petit to whom the said title and dignity shall descend, pursuant to the limitations of the patent whereby the said dignity was granted, shall take upon themselves respectively the names of 'dinshaw maneckjee petit' in lieu and in the place of any other name of names whatever .....

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 //