Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: recent Court: supreme court of india Year: 2004 Page 1 of about 108 results (0.071 seconds)

Oct 07 2004 (SC)

P.S. Sathappan (Dead) by Lrs. Vs. Andhra Bank Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-07-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC5152; 2004(5)CTC209; JT2004(8)SC464; (2005)1MLJ105(SC); RLW2005(1)SC19; 2004(8)SCALE601; (2004)11SCC672

..... 1 of the cpc.c) there is no inconsistency between section 104 read with order 43 rule 1 and the appeals under letters patent, as letters patent in any way does not exclude or override the application under section 104 read with order 43 rule 1 which shows that these ..... in the appeal against the ultimate decree in terms of section 105 thereof.nature and extent of power of the high court under letters patent :36. letters patent is a special statue but in the event of a conflict, as would appear from the discussions made hereinafter, the provisions of the ..... court exercising appellate jurisdiction, provided the judgment appealed against is not one which was preferred against an appellate order, meaning thereby that no letters patent appeal would lie against an order passed by a single judge in second appeal, or an order passed in revisional jurisdiction, the latter part ..... 1988]2scr1043 and dipak chandra ruhidas v. chandan kumar sarkar, : air2003sc3701 .52. even in the aforementioned cases also, it has been held that a letters patent appeal may be barred by implication.appeal under special statute:53. the question, however, may be different when an appeal is provided for under a special ..... election petition expressly provided under section 116a of the representation of the people act, it will be evident that a right of appeal under the letters patent had been held to have been taken away by necessary implication. (see n.p. ponnuswami v. returning officer. namakkal constituency and ors. 1952 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 2004 (SC)

M.P. Vidyut Karamchari Sangh Vs. M.P. Electricity Board

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-18-2004

Reported in : [2004(101)FLR670]; JT2004(3)SC423; (2004)IILLJ470SC; 2004(3)SCALE383; (2004)9SCC755; 2004(2)SLJ414(SC); (2004)2UPLBEC1313

..... as writ petition no. 7255 of 2000. the said writ petition was dismissed by a learned single judge of the high court where against the appellant herein preferred a letters patent appeal marked as letters patents appeal no. 34 of 2001. by reason of the impugned judgment dated 11.9.2001, the division bench dismissed the said appeal.high court

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 2004 (SC)

The State of West Bengal Vs. Kesoram Industries Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-15-2004

Reported in : (2004)187CTR(SC)219; [2004]266ITR721(SC); JT2004(1)SC375; 2004(1)SCALE425; (2004)10SCC201

..... to mean, "land ofwhatever description ... and includes all benefits to arise out of land".lands held for carrying on mining operations would be taken in by the saiddefinition. it is patently clear that 'minerals', which are benefitsarising out of land, will be roped in within the purview of the levy undersection 3(1) read with section 2(c) of the act ..... a grantor or lessor, on the working of the property leased, or otherwise on the profits of the grant of lease. the word is especially used in reference to mines/ patents and copyrights."prem's judicial dictionary (1992, vol. 2, page 1458) - "royalties are payments which the government may demand for the appropriation of minerals, timber or other property belonging to ..... the demised mineral worked within a specified period"wharton's law lexicon (fourteenth edition, page 893) - "royalty, payment to a patentee by agreement on every article made according to his patent; or to an author by a publisher on every copy of his book sold; or to the owner of minerals for the right of working the same on every ton ..... , that part of the reddendum which is variable, and depends upon the quantity of minerals gotten or the agreed payment to a patentee on every article made according to the patent. rights or privileges for which remuneration is payable in the form of a royalty"words and phrases, legally defined (third edition, 1990, vol.4, page 112) - "a royalty, in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 2004 (SC)

Divisional Manager, Plantation Division, Andaman and Nicobar Islands V ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-17-2004

Reported in : 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)212; 2005(1)AWC605(SC); (SCSuppl)2005(2)CHN74; 2005(3)ESC335; [2005(104)FLR375]; [2005(1)JCR220(SC)]; JT2005(11)SC530; (2005)ILLJ557SC; (2005)2SCC237; 2005(

..... respondent-workmen were proved beyond doubts. i, therefore, do not incline to interfere with the impugned award passed by the tribunal. i, accordingly, dismiss this writ petition.'8. a letters patent appeal there against was preferred before the division bench which was barred by limitation, as a delay of 103 days occurred in filing the same. as indicated hereinbefore, the delay ..... of 2001 (m.a.t. no. 12 of 2001) whereby and whereunder an application for condonation of 103 days' delay in filing an appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent of the calcutta high court was not condoned as also an order dated 10.10.2001 passed by another bench of the said high court refusing to review the said .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 2004 (SC)

Radhika Kapur and ors. Vs. D.L.F., Universal Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-17-2004

Reported in : AIR2005SC646; (2005)3CompLJ18(SC); JT2005(1)SC104; [2005]57SCL301(SC)

..... impugned order of the commission. in declining to grant the relief of possession by way of interim measure, the commission cannot be said to have committed a jurisdictional error or patent illegality. there is no perversity, nor irrelevant reasoning which makes the impugned order vulnerable to attack. no irreparable damage is caused to the appellants by declining the mandatory injunction to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 2004 (SC)

Employers, Management of Central P and D Inst. Ltd. Vs. Union of India ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-17-2004

Reported in : AIR2005SC633; 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)287; 2005(1)AWC618(SC); 2005(1)BLJR130; (2005)2CALLT89(SC); [2005(104)FLR373]; [2005(1)JCR129(SC)]; JT2005(1)SC148; (2005)ILLJ552SC; (2005)9SC

..... the writ petition. however while confirming the order of reinstatement it set aside the direction to pay back wages @ 50% of the salary last drawn. the management filed a letters patent appeal before the appellate bench of the said court. however, the same was dismissed and now the management is in appeal before us.5. from the previous orders of this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 2004 (SC)

Damoh Panna Sagar Rural Regional Bank and anr. Vs. Munna Lal Jain

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-17-2004

Reported in : AIR2005SC584; 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)329; 2005(1)AWC561(SC); 2005(3)ESC338; [2005(104)FLR291]; JT2005(1)SC70; (2005)ILLJ730SC; (2005)10SCC84; 2005(2)SLJ117(SC); 2005(1)LC430(SC);

..... single judge further held that the factum of illness of the wife had not been proved as no documents had been filed.4. the matter was carried in a letters patent appeal before the division bench. it was stand of the employee before the division bench that the money was withdrawn because of an emergency and he had some of money .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 16 2004 (SC)

Sarabhai M. Chemicals Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-16-2004

Reported in : 2004(97)ECC729; 2005(179)ELT3(SC); (2005)2SCC168

..... bench to decide the question on merits. in the circumstances, it was urged that the impugned majority decision dated 11.1.1999 dismissing the appeals, without going into merits, was patently erroneous. 13. on the question of applicability of the exemption notification, mr. ravindra narain, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant, submitted that the appellant had obtained a certificate ..... is on merits and other is on limitation.12. mr. ravindra narain, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted, at the outset, that, the impugned majority decision was patently erroneous. in this connection, it was urged that the j.m. had decided the question of limitation in favour of the appellant holding the demands to be time barred and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 2004 (SC)

State of Punjab and ors. Vs. Punjab Fibres Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-14-2004

Reported in : AIR2005SC437; JT2004(10)SC374; (2005)139PLR475; (2005)1SCC604; [2005]139STC200(SC)

orders.n. variava, j.1. these appeals are against the judgment dated 31st august 1998 of the punjab and haryana high court.2. briefly stated the facts are as follows.the first respondent is a spinning mill, which claimed benefit of notification issued by the punjab government on 23rd november 1979. as the decision in this case depends on the notification it is reproduced herein for the sake of convenience :-'the 23 rd november, 1979.no.s.o.82/p.a.46/48/s.5/amd./79. in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 of the punjab general sales tax act, 1948 (punjab act no.46 of 1948) and all other powers enabling him in this behalf, the governor of punjab is pleased to make the following further amendment in the punjab government excise and taxation department notification no.s.o.26/p.a./46/s.5/72 dated the 10th august, 1972 namely :- amendmentin the said notification, after the proviso to item 4, the following further proviso shall be added, namely;-provided further that the rate of purchase tax on cotton shall be two paise in a rupee on the purchases made by the textile mills established on or after the first december, 1979 for a period of five years to be reckoned from the aforesaid date subject to the following conditions:-(i)that these mills shall start production by 31st december 1981; and (ii)that these mills shall not despatch yarn in the course of inter-state transaction on consignment basis or through ex-state commission agents.' 3. initially, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 2004 (SC)

Hans Raj Sharma (Dead) by Lrs. Vs. Collector Land Acquisition, Tehsil ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-10-2004

Reported in : 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)205; 2005(1)AWC3(SC); 2005(1)CTC472; JT2004(10)SC513; 2005(2)MhLj557; (2005)141PLR22; 2004(10)SCALE365; (2005)1SCC553

..... . the single judge also increased the rate of interest to 6% per annum instead of 4% as directed by the district judge. the appellant still being dissatisfied moved a letters patent appeal before the high court claiming compensation @ rs. 8000/- per kanal in respect of land and rs. 75000/- for trees. the appeal was dismissed by the high court and thus .....

Tag this Judgment!


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