Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 2002 Page 10 of about 1,367 results (0.010 seconds)

Sep 19 2002 (HC)

Zahida NizamuddIn Jalal and ors. Vs. Abidali Jafferali Syyed and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-19-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)ALLMR206; 2003(2)BomCR374; 2002(4)MhLj913

..... corrected by the appellate court in appeal against the final judgment. undoubtedly, the apex court was dealing with meaning and construction of the word 'judgment' for the purpose of letters patent appeal.24. taking note of the explanation clause to section 115 of civil procedure code and its earlier decision in khanna v. dillon's case (supra) it was observed by the apex ..... order' is a term of well-known legal significance and does not present any serious difficulty. it has been used in various statutes including the code of civil procedure, letters patent of the high courts and other like statutes. any order which substantially affects the right of the accused, or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 27 2002 (HC)

Lokmat, Proprietors, Lokmat News Papers Ltd. Vs. Prabhakar Rambhauji C ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-27-2002

Reported in : 2003(4)BomCR391; [2003(97)FLR159]; (2003)IILLJ283Bom; 2003(1)MhLj485

..... within three months from the receipt of the communication of the order. the respondents carried the matter by preferring letters patent appeal before the division bench of this court. the division bench, by its, order dated 3rd december, 2001, dismissed the letters patent appeal and while dismissing the appeal, it observed that it is no doubt true that normally, the issue of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 16 2002 (HC)

Ram Shanker Gupta Alias Pappoo Vs. Additional District and Sessions Ju ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-16-2002

Reported in : 2003(2)AWC1376

..... recorded by the appellate authority on consideration of material on record. this court normally does not interfere with the said findings of facts unless such findings are shown to be patently illegal or perverse. no illegality or perversity has been shown in the said findings recorded by the appellate authority in the impugned order dated 17.10.2002.26. it is ..... ordinarily be interfered with by the high court in exercise of writ jurisdiction, unless the court is satisfied that the finding is vitiated by manifest error of law or is patently perverse. the high court should not interfere with a finding of fact simply because it feels persuaded to take a different view on the material on record. 15. the question .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 23 2002 (SC)

Pratap Singh Vs. State of Haryana and ors. and Shri Bhajan Lal and ors ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-23-2002

Reported in : AIR2002SC3385; [2003(96)FLR169]; JT2002(7)SC278; 2002LabIC3275; 2002(7)SCALE8; (2002)7SCC484; 2002(4)SCT471(SC); 2003(1)SLJ82(SC); (2002)3UPLBEC2672

..... bench did not find any good ground to differ with the findings recorded by the learned single judge and concurring with the reasons recorded by the learned single judge, letter patent appeals also were dismissed. aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this court in these petitions.4. mr. p.p. rao, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in s ..... shivaraj v. patil j.1. in these petitions, orders passed by the division bench of the high court dismissing the letter patent appeals affirming the order passed by the learned single judge are under challenge. the petitioner filed writ petitions claiming them to have been filed in the public interest questioning the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 2002 (SC)

Essen Deinki Vs. Rajiv Kumar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-29-2002

Reported in : AIR2003SC38; 2003(1)ALLMR(SC)361; 2003(1)ALT4(SC); 2003(1)AWC240(SC); [2002(95)FLR949]; JT2002(8)SC471; (2002)IIILLJ1111SC; (2002)8SCC400; (2003)1UPLBEC302

..... of india, the high court could not have set aside any finding reached by the lower authorities where two views were possible and unless those findings were found to be patently bad and suffering from clear errors of law. .....'6. adverting however, to the factual score at this juncture, it appears that the respondent-workman joined the services of the appellant ..... to interfere with the findings of fact.'4. needless to record that there is total unanimity of judicial precedents on the score that error must be that of law and patently on record committed by the inferior tribunal so as to warrant intervention-it ought not to act as a court of appeal and there is no dissention or even a .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 18 2002 (HC)

Indian Printing Press Works Vs. Union Territory of Delhi and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-18-2002

Reported in : 99(2002)DLT217; 2002(64)DRJ289; [2002(95)FLR301]; (2002)IIILLJ560Del; 2003(2)SLJ93(Delhi)

..... concerned, we are of the opinion that it wouldn't be proper to consider the said decision at this stage, as it is stated at the bar that a letters patent appeal there against is pending before the court. furthermore the decision of the division bench in hindustan carbide (supra) is binding on us. we, thereforee, in modification of the order ..... s.b. sinha, c.j.1. this letters patent appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 10th december 2001 passed by a learned single judge of this court in cwp no. 1872/00, whereby and hereunder, an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 14 2002 (HC)

Sushma Kohli @ Satya Devi Vs. Shyam Sunder Kohli

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Aug-14-2002

Reported in : 100(2002)DLT558

..... under article 142 of the constitution of india, which power, this court does not possess. 15. in the aforementioned backdrop, the question which arises for consideration in these two letter patent appeals are:(i) whether the learned single judge erred in allowing the appeal on the ground of desertion on the part of the wife? and (ii) whether the learned single ..... s.b. sinha, c.j. 1. these two letter patent appeals arise out of a judgment and decree dated 8th september, 2000 passed by a learned single judge of this court in fao 501/99.the fact of the matter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 2002 (HC)

Sameer Aggarwal Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-05-2002

Reported in : 102(2003)DLT702; 2003(67)DRJ198; (2003)IILLJ85Del; 2003(1)SLJ202(Delhi)

..... to entertain the writ petition and accordingly dismissed the same.7. being not satisfied with the order passed by the learned single judge, the appellant has filed the instant letters patent appeal.8. learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that as the appellant was not relieved by the second respondent the jural relationship between the appellant and the second respondent ..... anil dev singh, j. 1. this letters patent appeal is directed against the order of the learned single judge in cwp no. 1826. of 1998 dated 20.04.1998. by that order, the learned single judge rejected the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 05 2002 (HC)

Dalbir Singh Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-05-2002

Reported in : 2002(64)DRJ818

..... kalandara having not taken into consideration by the inquiry officer, the inquiry report suffers from material irregularity and the dismissal inflicted upon the petitioner based on such inquiry report is patently illegal. the petitioner was removed from service in the year 1987. as i have declared the order of removal illegal, i hereby quash the same. petitioner be reinstated forthwith with .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 2002 (HC)

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-02-2002

Reported in : AIR2002Ker357

..... 350 and cecure which are vitamin e and vitamin c and/or multi-vitamin tablets would fall within the definition of 'drugs'. the provisions of schedule v prescribing standards for patent or proprietory medicines also support the said stand. clause 2 thereof says that proprietory medicines containing vitamins for prophylactic, therapeutic or paediatric use shall contain vitamins in quantities not less ..... marketed for certain disease conditions in human beings and hence these are nothing but drugs. the statement also refers to schedule v of the act which depicts the standards of patent and proprietary medicines which clearly defines the therapeutic, prophylactic and paediatric doses of the vitamins in particular. it is also stated that these vitamins cannot be taken as food without .....

Tag this Judgment!

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