Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 1958 Page 1 of about 384 results (0.010 seconds)

Jun 04 1958 (HC)

V.B. Mohammed Ibrahim Vs. Alfred Schafraneck and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-04-1958

Reported in : AIR1960Kant173; AIR1960Mys173

..... , however, admitted that, on 4-3-46, defendants 1 and 2 alone applied for registering their names as inventors and for the grant of a patent in their favour. this application was finally sealed on 6-2-47, the day next after the release deed was passed. in this connection, the plaintiff ..... bring any suit for infringement of patent rights regarding the patent to question.'under these circumstance we have to hold that the plaintiff could not institute this suit under the provisions of section 29 of the ..... although the petitioner had assigned his rights to that plaintiff, the latter had not registered the assignment under the provisions of section 63 of the indian patents and designs act. therefore he was not the patentee within the meaning of the act (section 2, sub-section 12) and had no right to ..... by reason of the joint acquisition, the plaintiff has derived a beneficial interest in the plaintiff has derived a beneficial interest in the right of a patent. whether there is evidence to show that he has acquired this right or not, is a question of fact which will be discussed later.assuming ..... 1 to 3 from manufacturing or marketing flower design chair seats. these reliefs are apparently claimed on the ground that the plaintiff has the patent rights under the patents and designs act. but it is a curious suit in that the registered patentees are admittedly defendants 1 and 2 and, on their assignment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 1958 (HC)

Blackwood and Sons Ltd. and ors. Vs. A.N. Parasuraman and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-28-1958

Reported in : AIR1959Mad410

..... am unable to conceive of the possibility of such a course without attributing a local situation to that right.62. earlier i have set out instances of intangible rights like patents and trade marks as affording an analogy for reaching a decision in relation to copyright. the basis of the rule in those cases is to be found in the two ..... a debt be stipulated it will be there situate, the general rule notwithstanding. a cause of action in contract or tort is situate where action may be brought upon it. patents and trade marks are situate where they can be transferred on the same principle as shares in companies......the inference, however, must not be rawn that because no personal property ..... principle which fixes 'situs' with reference to the jurisdiction where the right could be enforced, and (3) lastly the analogy furnished by comparable intangible rights such as patents and trade marks (as to patents see 1932 ac 23858. if the intangible right whose situs has to be determined is a statutory right and owes its existence to a statute enacted by a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 1958 (FN)

Northern Pacific R. Co. Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-10-1958

..... be likely to result in economic detriment to vendees or lessees, and such uniqueness of the tying product as to suggest comparison with a monopoly by patent. but i venture to predict that the language of the court, taken in conjunction with its approval of the summary disposition of this case, will ..... by adopting the government's argument that this case should be brought within international salt by analogy of the ownership of land to that of a patent, so that the particular tract of land involved in each purchase or lease itself constitutes the relevant market. the record in any event is ..... to the need for clear proof on this issue. in fact, that case considered that, in international salt, the required element of proof was supplied by the patents themselves, which "conferred monopolistic, albeit lawful, market control" over the tying product, 345 u.s. at 345 u. s. 608 , as indeed the court ..... the court placed no reliance on the fact that a patent was involved, nor did it give the slightest intimation that the outcome would have been any different if that had not been the case. if anything ..... . s. 293 , 337 u. s. 305 . the defendant attempts to evade the force of international salt on the ground that the tying product there was patented, while here it is not. but we do not believe this distinction has, or should have, any significance. in arriving at its decision in international salt, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 23 1958 (HC)

Raj Kishan JaIn Vs. Tulsi Dass Etc.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-23-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H291

..... judge) under the delhi rent control act. on this ground also the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner fails. it follows that no letters patent appeal under clause 10 is competent against the judgment of a single judge of this court when an order has been passed under. article 227 of ..... been exercised in circumstances not covered by section 107 of the 1915 act. in this view of the matter it is obvious that no letters patent appeal lies from an order made in the exercise of power of superintendence whether in consonance with the provisions of section 107; or in accordance ..... on or connected with the setting up of the two dominions. neither this act nor the adaptation order specifically dealt with clause 10 of the letters patent. subject to changes introduced by the independence act the government of india act 1935 continued in force. then on 26th of january, 1950, our presentconstitution ..... of the constitution in exercise of power of superintendence was not appealable. the learned counsel for the appellant in reply has urged that a letters patent appeal against the order under article 227 is competent and in any case the judgment in question was made in substance under article 226 of ..... this petition as one under article 227 of the constitution and dismissed it. the landlord has filed this appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent.2. the learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection to this appeal and that is that the order under appeal being one .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 17 1958 (HC)

Bindra Ban and ors. Vs. Sham Sunder and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-17-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H83

..... rule, exercised the discretion and issued a writ. we have thus only to see if the discretion has been so improperly exercised as to call for interference under the letters patent. rule 52 prima facie relates to the individual disqualifications or defects of procedure in the election of a particular returned 'is doubtful if the rule would include an ..... of municipal committee, barnala, to be vacant and ordering that these members be restrained from discharging any of the functions, rights and duties of a member of the municipality. letters patent appeal no. 209 of 1957 is presented by the state and the other. no. 162 of 1957, by the members whose seats are declared to be vacant.2. elections for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 04 1958 (HC)

Kartar Singh Hira Singh and anr. Vs. Haripal Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-04-1958

Reported in : AIR1960P& H29

..... necessary for the appellant to obtain a certificate of fitness and he would have been at liberty to present an appeal to this court under clause 10 of the letters patent without any such certificate.two authorities of supreme court, namely nathoo lal v. durga prasad, air 1954 sc 355 and indira sohanlal v. custodian of evacuee property, delhi, (s) air ..... not competent as the learned judge by whom the order under appeal was passed had declined to certify that the case is a fit one for appeal to the letters patent bench.(4) section 63 of the states reorganisation act is in the following terms :63(1) all proceedings pending in the high court of patiala and east punjab states union ..... state of pepsu was integrated with the state of the punjab on 1-11-1956 and the appellants preferred an appeal to this court under clause 10 of the letters patent against the order of the learned chief justice of the pepsu high court. this appeal is now before us for consideration.(3) mr. nehra who appears for the respondents raises ..... a.n. bhandari, c.j. (1) this appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent raises the question whether a right of appeal which has been destroyed under the patiala and east punjab states union judicature ordinance, 2005 bk., has been revived by s. 63 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1958 (HC)

Bara Singh Vs. Joginder Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-03-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H370

..... constitution we should interfere with the order of the chief settlement commissioner which, in my opinion, he was in law fully competent to mako and in respect of which no patent legal error appears to have been committed. i would therefore allow this appeal, set aside the order of the learned single judge and dismiss the writ petition but, considering all ..... and the order of the chief settlement commissioner set aside.against the order of the learned single judge, bara singh has filed an appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent, and it is supported by the advocate-general on behalf of the chief settlement commissioner.2. the entire argument in this case turns on the powers of the chief settlement .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 1958 (HC)

Jagir Singh Vs. Dheru and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-04-1958

Reported in : AIR1958P& H487

..... instituted more than three years after the termination of the agency on the agent's death was barred by time. this is an appeal by the plaintiff under the letters patent.3. the only question that has to be determined is whether the case is governed by article 89 of schedule i of the limitation act. if it is, the suit ..... g.l. chopra, j.1. the only point involved in this letters patent appeal is one of limitation. the facts which are not disputed before us are these:2. jagir singh appellant appointed one nathn his 'mukhtar-i-am' (general attorney), on 15- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 1958 (HC)

The Karnal Kaithal Co-operative Transport Society, Ltd. Vs. the State ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-18-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H75; (1959)ILLJ274P& H

a.n. bhandri, c.j.1. this appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent raises the question whether it is within the competence of this court to set aside an order passed by the state government referring a certain dispute to an industrial tribunal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 10 1958 (HC)

Nihalu and anr. Vs. Chandar and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-10-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H115

a.n. bhandari, c.j.1. this appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent raises the question whether the purchaser of a co-owner's share in a specific part of the common property has a right to insist that the suit for partition .....

Tag this Judgment!

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