Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 1986 Page 5 of about 424 results (0.011 seconds)

Feb 20 1986 (HC)

Omprakash S/O Mulchand Khatri and ors. Vs. Fattelal Maganlal and Compa ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-20-1986

Reported in : 1986(3)BomCR33; 1986MhLJ414

..... positions of facts before us are that in respect of a house in writ petition no. 2694 of 1984, clause 7(1) applies and in respect of house in letter patent appeal no. 15 of 1980 clause 7(2) applies. writ petition is against the preliminary order relating to maintainability of application for fixation of fair rent whereas letters ..... patent appeal arises out of an order of determination of fair-rent. needless to mention that petitioners/appellants are landlords. as a necessary consequence of striking down clauses 6, 7, 7- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 1986 (HC)

Anopsinh Jatubha Vs. V.K. Gupta, Dist. Police Officer and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Jan-23-1986

Reported in : (1986)1GLR153; (1986)2GLR1; (1994)IIILLJ839Guj

..... fail since the procedure laid down under article 311(2) has not been followed on 'the facts and circumstances of the present case.7. for all these reasons, the letters patent appeals are allowed quashing the orders of termination passed by the respondents with a direction to reinstate the appellants forthwith with continuity of service. the appeals are allowed. no order ..... gokulakrishnan, c.j.1. these two letters patent appeals arise out of the oral judgment passed by the learned single judge of our high court in special civil application nos. 1329 and 1330 of 1984. the short facts .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 1986 (HC)

The Kailash District Co-operative Marketing and Supply Federation Ltd. ...

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-07-1986

Reported in : AIR1988HP1

..... expiry of prescribed period of limitation. the writ petition was allowed by a single judge of the court. the matter, however, being taken to the division bench in a letters patent appeal, the learned judges of the division bench reversed that decision. in doing so they relied upon the following observations of the supreme court made in the case of ittyavira ..... t.r. handa, j.1. this letters patent appeal is directed against the order dated 21st november, 1980, recorded by a single judge of this court allowing civil writ petition no. 148 of 1971 filed at the instance .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 04 1986 (HC)

Shaliabi Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-04-1986

Reported in : AIR1987Bom67; 1986(3)BomCR86; (1987)89BOMLR45

..... agricultural lands(ceiling on holdings) act, 1961 (the principal act), have been deleted] unenforceable for want of president's assent is the sole point to be determined in this letters patent appeal. section 45(2) as it stood before this amendment read thus:'the state government may suo motu or on an application made to it by an aggrieved person at .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 03 1986 (HC)

Commissioner for Excise, Karnataka and ors. Vs. J.L. Morison

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-03-1986

Reported in : 1986(10)ECC262; 1986(25)ELT660(Kar)

..... . entry 14e in the schedule to the central excises and salt act, 1944, at the relevant point of time read as under : ------------------------------------------------------------------------'item description of rate ofno. goods duty------------------------------------------------------------------------14e. patent or proprietary medicines notcontaining alcohol, opium, indianhemp or other narcotic drugs or othernarcotics other than those medicines ten per centwhich are exclusively ayurvedic, unani, ad valorem.sidha or homeopathic.explanation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 13 1986 (HC)

The Excise and Taxation Officer, Assessing Authority Vs. Hardit Singh ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-13-1986

Reported in : [1986]63STC152(P& H)

sukhdev singh kang, j. 1. the excise and taxation officer (assessing authority), ludhiana, who is appellant in this letters patent appeal, issued notice to the respondent m/s. hardit singh bhagat singh, a partnership concern, under section 11(2) of the punjab general sales tax act, 1948 (hereinafter called 'the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 1986 (SC)

Surinder Singh Vs. Central Government and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-26-1986

Reported in : AIR1986SC2166; 1986(2)SCALE550; (1986)4SCC667; [1986]3SCR946

..... to the authorities to finalise the auction sale held in their favour on january 17, 1969. a learned single judge after hearing the parties dismissed the petition. on a letters patent appeal a division bench of the high court allowed the appeal set aside the order of the learned single judge dismissing the writ petition, and quashed the order of shri .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 1986 (SC)

K.R. Mudgal and ors. Vs. R.P. Singh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-30-1986

Reported in : AIR1986SC2086; JT1986(1)SC597; (1987)ILLJ214SC; 1986(2)SCALE561; (1986)4SCC531; [1986]3SCR993; 1987(1)SLJ221(SC); 1987(1)LC223(SC)

..... writ petition was dismissed by the learned single judge. aggrieved by the decision of the learned single judge, the petitioners in the writ petition filed an appeal in the letters patent appeal no. 6 of 1978 before a division bench of the high court. the division bench allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of the learned single judge and held .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 1986 (HC)

Subodh Kumar and ors. Vs. Satya Swarup Singh Bhatti and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-03-1986

Reported in : 32(1987)DLT212

y.k. sabharwal, j. (1) in this letters patent appeal, the challenge is to the correctness of the judgment of the learned single judge of this court, who had dismissed the appellant's execution first appeal and had upheld .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 1986 (HC)

T. Varalakshmi Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-14-1986

Reported in : 30(1986)DLT222

..... for the ph.d. course. it also appears that the petitioner was treated as having patted the also. but, this was subject to the decision in the letters patent appeal. (5) we feel that we should not repeat the course adopted earlier of allowing the petitioner to get advantage of the degree or any other degree without .....

Tag this Judgment!

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