Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 1964 Page 5 of about 365 results (0.014 seconds)

May 21 1964 (HC)

In Re : Shankar Rao Govindrao Bhonsle

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : May-21-1964

Reported in : 1966CriLJ970

..... was sarpanch in march 1956 was not the ubradia gram panchayat but the ajanda gram panchayat. however, in october 1956 the name was changed to ubradia panchayat. thus it is patent, whether or not ramchandra sharma has written the receipt and the letter, that these two papers came into existence after october 1956 and of course before charge was taken in ..... , and if it is in itself plausible and generally consistent with the normal and honest discharge of duties, it should be accepted. but when the explanation involves an unusual and patently irregular happening, the accused should prove it like any other fact, and further establish that the irregularity is, apparent and not real or that there were special. circumstances in which ..... in a manner consistent with the trust that had been created. it may not be necessary for him in every case to show this by direct evidence. if it is patent that the monies i have been spent in accordance with the direction and for the purpose for which they were taken, then courts may believe it even though there is ..... was placed before them by ranchhodlal. thus in the following discussion the emphasis will be for the most part on what is admitted y the accused themselves and what is patent from the documents written by them.9. while the investigation into all these cases brought out irregularities of a serious nature in regard to a very large sum of money .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1964 (SC)

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Vs. Shibu Metal Works

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-09-1964

Reported in : AIR1965SC1076; [1965(11)FLR46]; (1965)ILLJ473SC; [1965]2SCR72

..... the object intended to be achieved by the insertion of the explanation in 1953 and the subsequent additions made to sch. i itself. we are, therefore, satisfied that the letters patent bench of the punjab high court was in error in holding that the respondent's factory did not fall within the scope of the material provisions of the act. incidentally ..... under the act, the learned judge held that the said claim was not justified. 5. the respondent then preferred an appeal under the letters patent before a division bench of the punjab high court. the letters patent bench has upheld the respondent's contention that the manufacture of brass utensils does not fell within the entry 'electrical, mechanical or general engineering products ..... that the respondent had been making deposits towards the provident fund as required by the act. 24. the result is, the appeal is allowed, the order passed by the letters patent bench is set aside and that of the learned single judge restored with costs throughout. 25. appeal allowed. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 01 1964 (HC)

Durga Prasad and Another Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward, Muzaffarnagar ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-01-1964

Reported in : [1965]57ITR583(All)

..... the law correctly until such time it is not overruled by a larger bench or the supreme court then there is no escape from the conclusion that there was a patent error of law and the issue of notice by the income-tax officer under section 34(1)(a) in the teeth of that decision had inevitably caused failure of justice ..... to issue the impugned notice beyond the period of limitation of eight years.learned counsel for the opposite party contended that it could not be said that there was a patent error of law or that there was any failure of justice by the issue of the notice under section 34(1)(a) and as such this was not a fit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1964 (SC)

B. Rajagopala Naidu Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-05-1964

Reported in : AIR1964SC1573; [1964]7SCR1

..... .c. 896, this court held by a majority decision that the orders and directions issued under s. 43a were merely executive or administrative in character and their breach, even if patent, would not justify the issue of a writ of certiorari. it was also observed that though the orders were executive and did not amount to statutory rules, they were rules ..... letters patent appeal preferred by the appellant. the appellant then moved the said high court for leave, but failed to secure it, and that brought him here with an application for special ..... failed and the learned single judge who heard his writ petition dismissed the petition, on october 18, 1962. the appellant then challenged the correctness of this decision by a letters patent appeal no. 214 of 1962 before a division bench of the said high court. the division bench, however, agreed with the view taken by the single judge and dismissed the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 1964 (SC)

Municipal Corporation for Greater Bombay Vs. Lala Pancham of Bombay an ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-01-1964

Reported in : AIR1965SC1008; [1965]1SCR542

..... by the plaintiffs to the high court which was dismissed summarily by datar j., on august 25, 1961. on the same day the plaintiffs preferred an appeal under the letters patent which went up before a division bench consisting of patel and palekar jj. the learned judges permitted the plaintiffs to amend the plaint overruling the objections of the defendants. in ..... before the trial court and ordinarily they would not have been entitled to lead fresh evidence at that stage, much less so at the stage of the appeal under letters patent. according to them, however, it is not possible to dispose of the case on the material on record, that there are certain documents on record which, if unexplained, 'support in ..... the fact that in such a case a party should not be allowed to adduce fresh evidence at the appellate stage and much less so at the stage of letters patent appeal. then it observed : 'if the case had rested thus the matter would have been very simple apart from the amendment application. it seems to us however that it is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 1964 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat Vs. Shantilal Punjabhai

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-01-1964

Reported in : [1965]57ITR58(Guj)

..... that decision was binding upon the court. we may, with respect, point out that it would not be strictly correct to say that the division bench which heard the letters patent appeal in vasantsen's case had not considered the question of the validity of proviso (2) of section 34(3). in fact, the division bench expressly held, as already pointed ..... a different point, not the constitutional point, being ultra vires of article 14 had been raised before the learned trial judge against whose decision the division bench heard a letters patent appeal. they have also pointed out that the learned trial judge upheld that objection and held that the second proviso infringed article 14. at page 175 of the report, they ..... provision of law, and that the principle laid down by the supreme court in suraj mall mohta & co. v. a. v. visvanatha sastri, applied. he held that the second proviso patently introduced an unequal treatment in respect of some out of the same class of persons. those whose liability to pay tax was discovered by one method could be proceeded against .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 27 1964 (HC)

Thakrani Gulabkunverba Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Aug-27-1964

Reported in : AIR1966Guj1

..... be enforced against the jagir. such a right of the bhayat to be maintained by the jagir was held to be certainly an incident of jagir. the tribunal was, therefore, patently wrong and it proceeded on a clear misconception of the term 'incident of jagir' in rejecting the claim of the petitioners in third group of cases also on the ground ..... , by the harmonious interpretation given by this court to section 14(2) the same result has been achieved. the order of the tribunal, therefore, in all these appeals is therefore, patently illegal and must he quashed 8. mr. sompura, however, raised a contention that such a cash allowance could not be an incident of jagir and, therefore, the appeals in question ..... the decision of the tribunal, the petitioners have filed these 11 petitions.5. the short question which mr. patel raised wits that the tribunal had committed a jurisdictional or other patent error of law in not following the law settled by the division bench of the bombay high court which was binding on it. the said unreported decision was delivered on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 1964 (HC)

The Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat, Ahmedabad Vs. Shantilal Punja ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-01-1964

Reported in : AIR1966Guj106

..... . and that the principle laid down by the supreme court in suraj mall mohta & co. v. a. v. visvanatha sastri : [1954]26itr1(sc) applied. he held that the second proviso patently introduced an unequal treatment in respect of some out of the same class of persons. those whose liability to pay tax was discovered by one method could be proceeded against ..... to sub-section (3) of section 34 being ultra vires of article 14 had been raised before the learned trial judge against whose decision the division bench heard a letters patent appeal. they have also pointed out that the learned trial judge upheld that objection and held that the second proviso infringed article 14. at page 176 of the report, they ..... that decision was binding upon the court. we may, with respect, point out that it would not be strictly correct to say that the division bench which heard the letters patent appeal in vasantsen's case : [1956]29itr857(bom) had not considered the question of the validity of proviso (2) to section 34(5). in fact, the division bench expressly held .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1964 (HC)

The Mysore Machinery Manufacturers Ltd. Vs. the Asst. Commissioner of ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-12-1964

Reported in : AIR1965Kant295; AIR1965Mys295; (1965)1MysLJ287

..... first respondent has refused to accord approval for the dismissal of his four workmen (2nd respondent in each of these petitions, who will be hereinafter referred to as 'workman') on patently erroneous grounds and therefore he seeks to have those orders quashed.(3) the 1st respondent refused to accord the approvals prayed for under section 33(2)(b) of the industrial ..... , it must be held that the petitioner has complied with the conditions laid down in the proviso to section 33(2)(b) of the act. the 1st respondent committed a patent error of law in holding that the conditions laid down in the proviso in question have not been satisfied. the error committed by the 1st respondent, in this regard also .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1964 (SC)

Jyoti Prokash Mitter Vs. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Himansu Kumar Bose, Chief ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-09-1964

Reported in : AIR1965SC961; [1965]2SCR53

..... , and so, he dismissed the appellant's writ petition in limine on january 3, 1962. 3. the appellant challenged the correctness of this decision by preferring an appeal under letters patent before a division bench of the said high court. mitter and laik jj. who constituted this bench, however, differed, and so, the learned chief justice had to constitute a special ..... after court hours. it is the validity of this order which has been impeached by the appellant in the present writ proceedings. the appellant contended that respondent no. 1 was patently in error in seeking to enforce an order passed by government of india as an executive order by which they purported to determine his age. on this basis, he claimed .....

Tag this Judgment!


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