Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 1958 Page 9 of about 384 results (0.009 seconds)

Apr 01 1958 (HC)

Shantilal Rawji Vs. M.C. Nair, Iv Income-tax Officer, E Ward, Bombay, ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-01-1958

Reported in : [1958]34ITR439(Bom)

..... pointed out as to what is the exact significance of the expression 'error apparent on the face of the record' and at page 340 we say : 'a mistake must be patent on the record; it must not be a mistake which can be discovered by a process of elucidation or argument or debate. the mistake being ..... patent on the record rectification must be limited to correcting that mistake only without any further argument or debate.' 4. the contention of the department is that looking to the provision .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 1958 (HC)

Engineering Staff Union and anr. Vs. the State of Bombay and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-26-1958

Reported in : (1959)61BOMLR1347

..... of reference should have been for increase retrospectively from january 1st 1954. he further contends that having regard to the arbitrary and capricious opinion as formed by the government as patent on the order of refernece i should come to the conclusion that governemnt has not applied its mind at all or has for its own reasons misconceived its jurisdiction under ..... of the whole of the demand and or dispute raised between the employer and the employee. he has in developing those contentions laid emphasis on the fact that it was patent on the record before the conciliatiion officer and in the report of the conciliation officer and otherwise also that the demand of the petitioners was for revision of dearness allowance .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 1958 (HC)

Shrinibai Manchershaw Mehanty and anr. Vs. State of Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-26-1958

Reported in : (1959)61BOMLR1191

..... by reason of release of the premises in queston to such person. for this contention he places emphasis on sub-setion (2) of section 9 and says that it is patent that on de-requistion physical psssession is directed to be restored. it is not possible, he says, tocomplete the de-requistion phuscial possesision is restored. it is not possible, he ..... after 4-12-1947 and to requisition the said premises for a public purpose, namely, for housing a bombay state government servant. x x x x x. '(7) it is patent that the requisition order in question is made on the basis that the premises had become vacant on 3-7-1958, by reason of the de-requisition order dated 3 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 1958 (HC)

Engineering Staff Union Vs. State of Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-26-1958

Reported in : (1959)IILLJ729Bom

..... of reference should have been for increase retrospectively from 1 january, 1954. he further contends that having regard to the arbitrary and capricious opinion as formed by the government as patent on the order of reference i should come to the conclusion that government has not applied its mind at all or has for its own reasons misconceived its jurisdiction under ..... of the whole of the demand and/or dispute raised between the employer and the employee. he has, in developing those contentions, laid emphasis on the fact that it was patent on the record before the conciliation offer and in the report of the conciliation offer and otherwise also that the demand of the petitioners was for revision of dearness allowance .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 08 1958 (HC)

Murali Krishna Rice Mill Vs. Additional Income Tax Officer

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-08-1958

Reported in : [1959]36ITR239(AP)

..... act thus provides a hierarchy of tribunals where the petitioner can agitate his contentions. mr. ranganathachari, however, has submitted that the want of jurisdiction in the income-tax officer being patent, the petitioner should not be driven to seek his remedies before the authorities provided under the act and that this is a fit case for the exercise of jurisdiction under ..... jurisdiction, which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner gives jurisdiction to this court to quash the assessment order itself at this stage, cannot be said to be so patent. having regard to the undoubted and adequate remedies which the petitioner has under the income-tax act and having regard to the further fact that the petitioner has himself taken .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 1958 (HC)

Mahendra Pal Singh and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-27-1958

Reported in : AIR1959All313; 1959CriLJ541

..... also, but in their case it is provided that review will be permissible if it is authorized by the letters patent or the other instrument constituting the high court.it is not suggested on behalf of the applicants that the letters patent or the other instrument constituting the allahabad high court contain anything authorising this court to review its judgments. it may .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 1958 (HC)

Assistant Custodian, Evacuee Property, Shahjahanpur Vs. Civil Judge, S ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-25-1958

Reported in : AIR1959All574

..... agreeable. there is some ground for questioning the correctness of the opinion that, the custodian is not a necessary party. but it cannot be said that that opinion discloses a patent error. nor does the observation that the plaintiffs are not agreeable, disclose any such error. so, although the view of the trial court as regards the applicability of section 50 ..... of the act was not sound, the order read as a whole cannot be said to disclose a patent error of law. so no interference is possible under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution. both the connected proceedings must be dismissed.19. civil revision no. 637 of 1956 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1958 (HC)

Satya Deo Gupta Vs. Amrit Dhara Pharmacy

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-19-1958

Reported in : AIR1958All823

..... . it may be noted here that in this case, we are not concerned with the composition of the medicine produced. that would be a matter under the patent law. if a particular prescription is patented, any other firm may not produce a medi-cine with the same prescription. but here we haveonly to see whether the goods produced by the applicant shri .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 1958 (HC)

Ramlal Singh and ors. Vs. the State

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : May-14-1958

Reported in : AIR1958MP380; 1958CriLJ1402

..... fact that the discretion must be exercised by reference to all the circumstances of each particular case, and, allowance must be made when the motive for uttering a falsehood is patent on the face of it. in the present case, keshar singh p. w. 2, was belaboured by the accused; he became unconscious as a result o the injuries and continued ..... under section 302 read with section 149 of the indian penal code on a misreading of the evidence on record. this reference is governed by clause 26 of the letters patent, under which i am entitled to decide only the point of difference between the learned judges and not any point on which they have agreed. therefore, only the question of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 1958 (HC)

Maursinha Vs. State of M.P.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-26-1958

Reported in : AIR1958MP397

..... , 1922, their lordships were obviously considering the same from the point as to whether there was or there was not an error apparent on the face of the record. such patent error did appear to their lordships on the face of the record having regard to the charges and their explanation rendered by the kareli municipality.the error amounted to one ..... do is to demolish the order which, according to its view, is without jurisdiction or palpably erroneous. it cannot substitute its own view for those of the inferior tribunal. the patent error must be an error of law revealed on the face of the order; vide t. c. basappa v. t. nagaupa, air 1954 sc 440 (l).39. with these principles .....

Tag this Judgment!


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