Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: recent Court: mumbai Year: 2005 Page 8 of about 154 results (0.008 seconds)

Jul 08 2005 (HC)

Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Mahavidyalaya Vs. Mansingh S/O Dhondiba Shitol ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-08-2005

Reported in : 2006(1)ALLMR331; 2005(4)MhLj1095

..... was not in accordance with the advertisement dated 23-5-1988, whereby the post was reserved for backward class candidate. shri kulkarni, submitted that the order of the tribunal being patently erroneous and illegal, this court under article 227 of the constitution of india, should interfere in the said order. lastly, shri kulkarni, contended that even if this court comes to ..... the appellant cannot be considered for being appointed as a lecturer in the said college. lastly, shri kulkarni, contended that the order of reinstatement with payment of backwages is thus patently illegal as the appellant has no cause or right to make any complaint about the order of termination. he submitted all the three appointment orders which are issued by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 2005 (TRI)

Manmohan Gupta and Actis Vs. Commissioner of Customs (import)

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-07-2005

Reported in : (2005)(191)ELT907Tri(Mum.)bai

..... " submitted by the respondent, a purported document which cannot be relied upon. it is evident that to hide relevant and material facts which would have enabled the appellant to demonstrate patent flaws and/or irrelevancy of the purported us report this wrongful and illegal methodology has been adopted by the respondent customs authorities in the present case, thus vitiating the entire ..... price trend in respect of it products which went down with passage of time. vi) the us customs had reported that m/s performa was started in 1998 which was patently wrong as the annexure a and annexure b of the indian customs which proposed to levy differential customs duty gave instances of supplies made by the m/s performa are .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 06 2005 (HC)

Zenith Ltd. Vs. M.V. Pontoporos and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-06-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)BomCR452

..... i see no reason why these words in the act should be construed so narrowly as to exclude a wholly-owned subsidiary company claiming, as here, a right to sell patented articles which it has obtained from and been ordered to sell by its parent. of course, if the arbitration proceedings so decide, it may eventually turn out that the parent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 30 2005 (HC)

Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs. Sunfield Resources Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-30-2005

Reported in : 2006(1)BomCR850; 2005(4)MhLj607

..... any way, derogate from the above position. merely because a subsequent letter was written, does not alter the undisputed position emerging as above and, therefore, the learned arbitrator committed a patent error in not giving due weight to the undisputed position emerging from the admitted documents on record.it is the contention of the claimant that because the confirmation of the ..... support of its plea of exclusion made in its written statement and there was no objection to the same for want of particulars in the pleadings. as such, it is patently unjust and improper for the learned arbitrator not to exclude the said period in the calculations of demurrage merely on the ground that the pleading in this behalf is general ..... by way of demurrage, the learned arbitrators could not have awarded the same unless the claimant proved the same.7. it is submitted that the learned arbitrator has committed a patent error of law in holding that the claim for demurrage is not by way of damages and has thereby proceeded on an erroneous basis in granting the claim without the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 28 2005 (HC)

Hariharrao Vishwanathrao Bhosikar Vs. Datta Anandrao Pawar and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-28-2005

Reported in : 2006(1)ALLMR702; 2005(4)MhLj211

..... to answer the allegations. the last contention of the learned counsel is that the collector while permitting the complaints to add the leader of the parties as a complainant is patently erroneous order, passed by the collector in total defiance of the rigour of the statute. they submitted that there is no scope for the collector to take help of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 2005 (HC)

Kishan S/O Ganpati Muley Deceased Lrs. Indrabai W/O Kishanrao Muley an ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-20-2005

Reported in : 2006(2)BomCR841; 2005(4)MhLj180

..... required to be considered and on that wrong assumption, the statutory declaration made in favour of the tenant came to be declared invalid which according to the learned advocate is patent error. he submitted that it was not the intention of the legislature nor a requirement of law to enquire into holdings of the heirs/successors of the landholder. he submitted ..... or share in the property of deceased-abdul quadar and the land remained undivided even after 5th may, 1957. therefore, in my judgment, all the three authorities below have committed patent error appearing on the face of record in holding that the family holding of each of the heirs of deceased abdul quadar is to be taken into consideration, which making ..... and if such error which is self-evident; even in cases where two views are reasonably possible in the same material, the findings arrived at cannot be called as a patent error. keeping the above parameters as deduced from surya dev rai and ranjeet singh's case, i had to judge the contention. in my judgment, the findings on the point .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 2005 (TRI)

D.C. Polyester Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-17-2005

Reported in : (2005)(188)ELT423Tri(Mum.)bai

2. the ld. counsel for the appellant submitted that in his written submission filed before the tribunal he has specifically mentioned that the issued involved in the present case is squarely covered in favour of the appellant by the decision in the appellant's own cases of commissioner of customs, mumbai-ii v. d.c. polyesters pvt. ltd. reported in 2004 (176) e.l.t. 471 (tri. - mumbai) and commissioner of central excise, mumbai-iii v. d.c. polyester pvt. ltd. . while passing the order these two decisions have not been considered and as such the order suffers from the patent error and as such he submitted that the rom application may be allowed.3. the ld. jdr has no serious objection in allowing the rom application.4. i, therefore, allow the rom application. the case is fixed for regular hearing on 22-7-05.

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 16 2005 (HC)

Kashinath S/O Ramkrishna Chopade Vs. Purushottam Tulshiram Tekade and ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-16-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)ALLMR519; 2005(6)BomCR267; 2005(4)MhLj471

..... the basis of the evidence, oral and documentary, and inasmuch as the oral evidence as recorded has wholly been excluded by the learned additional district judge, that has created a patent error on the approach to the case in question which has the effect of vitiating the judgment as recorded by the learned additional district judge.5. mr. chandurkar, learned counsel .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 16 2005 (HC)

Satish Dalichand Shah Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-16-2005

Reported in : AIR2005Bom442; 2006(1)BomCR922

..... appellate court that the suit filed by the appellant was barred by law of limitation and we do hereby confirm the same. for the reasons stated above, therefore, the letters patent appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. there shall be no order as to costs.20. at this state, the learned advocate for the appellant prays for direction to maintain status .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 16 2005 (HC)

Sanjay Sampatrao Gaikwad Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-16-2005

Reported in : II(2006)ACC424; 2006ACJ656; AIR2005Bom409

..... that regard is pronounced, and the railway administration would be liable to pay interest therefrom but not prior to that date.21. for the reasons stated above, therefore, the letters patent appeals partly succeed. the impugned judgment is therefore to be set aside while allowing the appeals to the extent that the compensation as was awarded by the railway tribunal along ..... regarding the appellant-gaikwad being a bona fide passenger has attained finality for all purposes and it is too late for the respondent to agitate the same in the letters patent appeal filed by the appellant, and that too, without any material on record to substantiate the said contention.17. the next point which arises for consideration pertains to the liability .....

Tag this Judgment!


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