Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: recent Court: mumbai Year: 2005 Page 3 of about 154 results (0.008 seconds)

Nov 16 2005 (HC)

Arun Keshavrao Mone (Mane) and ors. Vs. Ramesh Balvant Baxi and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-16-2005

Reported in : 2006(2)ALLMR136; 2006(2)MhLj203

..... by a single judge of the high court in an appeal preferred under section 76, trade marks act, constitutes a judgment within the meaning of cl. 15 of the letters patent. in : [1998]2scr648 , saiyad mohammad bakar el-edroos v. abdulhabib hasan arab hon'ble apex court has stated that in proceedings for settling scheme under section 50a of bombay public .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 2005 (TRI)

Sonata Information Technology Vs. Dy Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-11-2005

Reported in : (2006)7SOT465(Mum.)

..... of ssl was much more expenditure oriented than business activity of assessee. hence, in his opinion, the expenditure on support services to the assessee in the ratio of turnover was patently wrong. after going through the agreement, it was also held that ssl was required to advise the assessee in the matters of finance, accounts, taxation, legal, administration, hrd etc., and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 2005 (TRI)

Dy. Cit Vs. Ramnord Research Labs. (P.) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-09-2005

..... sub-clause of section 32 provides that expenditure incurred on the premises taken on leave and licence basis is to be treated as capital expenditure. this formation of belief is patently incorrect in law. explanation 1 of section 32(1) on the other hand provides that where a premises has been taken on leave and license basis then for the purpose .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 2005 (HC)

Shree Ram Mills Limited Vs. Kalpataru Construction Overseas Pvt. Ltd. ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-27-2005

Reported in : 2006(1)ARBLR229(Bom); 2006(1)BomCR89; (2005)107BOMLR779

..... proceeded to appoint the receiver and confer upon him powers to develop the property of the petitioner, needs to be interfered with. the order and direction in that behalf is patently unsustainable being vitiated by obvious error as aforesaid. 83. however, we are of the view that since the arbitral tribunal is yet to go into the claim of the petitioner ..... prima facie. he invites our attention to para 3.24(g) of the petition and the affidavit in reply containing denial on this aspect. mr. chagla submits that denial is patently false. 57. for all the aforesaid reasons, mr. chagla submits that there is strong prima facie case made out by the petitioner. balance of convenience is also in favour of ..... the subject of the contract, much less for the larger plot which was not even the subject of the contract. 42. mr. bobde submits that the learned single judge has patently misread the letter dated 14th january 2005. mr. bobde further submits that the letter only says that the respondent confirms and accepts the clause suggested regarding the guarantees. it does ..... s.c. dharmadhikari, j.1. this appeal under section 37 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 (for short 'the arbitration act') read with clause 15 of the letters patent challenges an order passed by a learned single judge in arbitration petition no. 78 of 2005. by the order under challenge, the learned single judge has, on a petition filed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 26 2005 (HC)

Maheshwar Dattatraya Kale Vs. Capt. Atul Wasudeo Divekar and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-26-2005

Reported in : IV(2006)BC424; 2006CriLJ606; 2006(1)MhLj700

..... fine and therefore, the order passed by the learned magistrate directing that in default of payment of compensation, the applicant will have to suffer simple imprisonment for 10 days is patently illegal. he submitted that under section 389 of the said code, the learned additional sessions judge could not have imposed condition while suspending substantive sentence by directing the applicant to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 25 2005 (HC)

Maharastra Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd. and ors. Vs. S ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-25-2005

Reported in : (2006)3LLJ102Bom

..... producers. the court will, of course, examine if there is any hostile discrimination. that is a different 'cup of tea' altogether.32. the learned counsel argued that there were several patent errors which came to light during the course of the hearing in the high court. he said that obsolete quantitative usages had been taken into consideration, proximate cost data had .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 25 2005 (HC)

Vibha Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-25-2005

Reported in : (2006)ILLJ895Bom; 2005(4)MhLj1111

..... producers. the court will, of course, examine if there is any hostile discrimination. that is a different 'cup of tea' altogether.''32. the learned counsel argued that there were several patent errors which came to light during the course of the hearing in the high court. he said that obsolete quantitative usages had been taken into consideration, proximate cost data had .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 2005 (HC)

Walchandnagar Industries Limited (Engineering and Foundary Division) V ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-20-2005

Reported in : 2005(6)BomCR733; (2005)107BOMLR942; (2006)IILLJ834Bom

..... said settlement is valid, just, proper and binding on all the employees including the present respondents.it is specifically mentioned that the respondents in letters patent appeal no. 212 of 2002, being the members of the recognised union and since the recognised union has signed the said settlement, after having ..... to the extent of termination of his services. out of the members of the said recognised union, only 4 persons, namely, respondents in letters patent appeal no. 212 of 2002 have challenged the said settlement. thus, it will be noticed that all the employees, whether members or non-members of ..... v. bukhari has relied upon several cases, which will be dealt with in the later part of the judgment. he ultimately submitted that these letters patent appeals may be allowed.21. learned counsel shri. s.m.dharap, who appears for the respondent, submitted that though there is no pleading in respect ..... category of non-members of the recognised union. out of those 13 non members of the recognised union, only one employee the respondent in letters patent appeal no. 213 of 2002, namely, mr. mulani, has challenged the said settlement. it is further to be noted that out of 318 ..... preferred write petition no. 4734 of 1994 against the common order passed by the member, industrial court, referred to above, from which the present letter patent appeals arise. while disposing of the writ petition no. 4734 of 1994, the learned single judge of this court, after disposing of the writ petition .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 2005 (HC)

ishtiyaq Ali Farad Ali (Since Deceased by His Heirs and Legal Represen ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-20-2005

Reported in : 2006(1)ALLMR74; 2006(3)BomCR676; 2006(2)MhLj737

h.l. gokhale, j.1. by the present appeal, the appellants seek to challenge the judgment and order of a single judge dated 11th july, 1994 in first appeal no. 92 of 1979 which was filed by the original respondent (since deceased) and which appeal came to be allowed by the said judgment. that appeal arose out of the judgment and order rendered by a judge of city civil court, mumbai on 6th november, 1978, in short cause suit no. 426 of 1962, which was filed by the original respondent (since deceased). it was filed for seeking possession of the suit premises and came to be dismissed by the learned city civil judge.2. the short facts leading to this litigation are as follows:the premises concerned are room no. 46 on the first floor of the chawl known as gani attarwala chawl situated in ghelabhai street, mumbai-8. it was the case of the original respondent/plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as respondent) that he inducted the original appellant (hereinafter referred to as appellant) in the premises as his licensee by virtue of an agreement entered into between two of them on 20th april, 1959. after the expiry of that agreement, he called upon the appellant herein to vacate the premises by letter dated 11th january, 1962. the appellant did not oblige, therefore, the respondent herein filed aforesaid suit praying for a direction that the appellant be directed to deliver vacant possession of the suit premises. he also sought arrears of compensation charges and the mesne profits.3. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 2005 (HC)

Bombay Environmental Action Group, a Society Registered Under the Soci ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-17-2005

Reported in : 2005(6)BomCR574; (2005)107BOMLR337; (2006)4CompLJ117(Bom)

..... elevator employees union v. union of india - : (2004)illj217sc wherein the apex court has held that unless legislation which is a manifestation of the policy decision of the state is patently arbitrary, court will not interfere in the implementation of such a policy. the learned advocate general thereafter referred to another decision of the hon'ble supreme court in the case ..... in the case of otis elevators - : (2004)illj217sc the learned advocate general for the state has pointed out the observations of the supreme court that if the legislation is not patently arbitrary, this court will not monitor implementation of such policy, unless the same is discriminatory or arbitrary. the hon'ble supreme court endorsed the view of the high court that .....

Tag this Judgment!


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