Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 2002 Page 11 of about 1,367 results (0.010 seconds)

Oct 19 2002 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gujarat State Fertilizers Co. Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-19-2002

Reported in : (2003)179CTR(Guj)266; [2003]259ITR526(Guj)

..... of development rebate. section 43a(1) itself refers to section 35(1)(iv) {capital expenditure on scientific research related to the business) and section 35a (capital expenditure on acquisition of patent rights or copy- rights) which are also one time allowances. there are many other one time allowances, but none of them is specifically excluded by the legislature except the development ..... of fluctuation in the foreign exchange rate even in case of some other one time allowances like those for scientific research under section 35(1)(iv) or for acquisition of patent rights under section 35a.43. for the aforesaid reasons, we are of the view that, with respect, the division bench in the windsor foods ltd.'s case : [1999]235itr249(guj .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 12 2002 (HC)

Mohanlal S/O Gowardhan Baid and anr. Vs. Khandelwal Brothers Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-12-2002

Reported in : 2002(5)BomCR648; (2002)3BOMLR618; 2002(3)MhLj835

..... , the respondent can file a substantive first appeal against the decree. neither of these two courses of action have bean adopted by the respondent. instead, the respondent has followed a patently misconceived remedy of instituting a separate suit.8. lastly, as regards the contention of the respondent that the earlier suit was barred by limitation, this would not render the decree .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 09 2002 (HC)

islamic Republic of Iran Vs. M.V. Mehrab and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-09-2002

Reported in : AIR2002Bom517; (2002)4BOMLR785; 2002(4)MhLj584

..... , it cannot be maintained solely for the purpose of obtaining security. rejecting the argument of the defendants the court denied the defendants motion to vacate attachment. the court made it patently clear that the supplemental admiralty rule b attachment is not precluded by a prior commencement of arbitration.12. apart from u.k. canada, and usa many other systems of law ..... admiralty jurisdiction. the admiralty jurisdiction of the high courts in india can be historically traced to the charters of 1774 and 1798 as subsequently expanded and clarified by the letters patent of 1823, 1862 and 1865 and read with admiralty courts act, 1861, colonial courts admiralty act, 1890 and colonial courts of admiralty (india) act, 1891. section 2(1) of 1890 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 2002 (HC)

Shyam Charan Lal Vs. Ram Gopal Gupta

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-05-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)AWC489

..... as well as comparative hardships.14. this court in the exercise of writ jurisdiction normally does not interfere with the findings of fact unless such findings are shown to be patently illegal or perverse. no illegality or perversity has been committed by authorities below in recording the said findings of fact on the questions of bond fide need and comparative hardships ..... 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. the question that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 2002 (HC)

Khalilur Rahman Vs. Smt. Noor Jahan Alias Noori

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-03-2002

Reported in : 2003(3)AWC2232

..... facts are normally not interfered with by this court in the exercise of writ jurisdiction under article 226 of the constitution of india unless such findings are shown to be patently illegal or perverse. no illegality or perversity has been shown in the findings recorded by the authorities below. therefore, no interference is called for with the findings of facts recorded ..... 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. 25. the question .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 21 2002 (HC)

Allahabad Bank and ors. Vs. Surendra Kumar Mishra

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-21-2002

Reported in : (2003)IILLJ373MP; 2003(1)MPLJ574

..... bank account. the appellants were directed to finalise the matter within the stipulated time. it is against this order of the learned single judge, the appellant has filed this letters patent appeal. 6. we have heard shri anoop nair, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and shri atul awasthy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents at the motion stage and perused ..... by the learned single judge in writ petition no. 4060 of 2001 (since reported in 2002(2) mplj 395, appellants have preferred this appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent. 2. facts shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows: 'in the year 1994 respondent was working as marketing manager in the regional office .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 09 2002 (HC)

Sarveshwar Nath Singh Vs. Jharkhand Intermediate Education Council and ...

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : May-09-2002

Reported in : 2002(50)BLJR1251

..... of the council being totally alien to the aforesaid act, the same being de hors the act and clearly being contrary to its specific and express provisions, is wholly and patently erroneous and illegal. not merely a technical illegality has been committed, but even the legislative intent has been defeated and frustrated by the- government of jharkhand in not appointing the ..... order1. in this petition, amongst various other reliefs, the petitioner claims that the respondents have committed a patent illegality in appointing an administrator for the jharkhand intermediate education council, because according to the petitioner, law does not contemplate such an appointment of an administrator.2. mr. pandey neeraj .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 2002 (HC)

Nirmal Singh Vs. State of Delhi

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-05-2002

Reported in : 2002IIIAD(Delhi)1119; 97(2002)DLT545; I(2002)DMC674; 2002(62)DRJ654

..... fire. there is absolutely no reason to doubt his evidence. ....." 31. as regards the corroboration indeed the corroboration can come forward in many ways. in the present case it was patent that she was set on fire in her matrimonial home. strangely enough, the appellant or his mother or his sister did not take her to hospital. it was the servant ..... such a statement giving the history of the case of the doctor, which is not corroborated. 30. taking all the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, it is patent firstly that it is well known that dying declaration is a statement made by the person as to the cause of death or to any of the circumstances of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 2002 (HC)

Hindustan Zinc Limited Vs. Jagmal Ram and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-18-2002

Reported in : [2002(95)FLR516]; RLW2003(3)Raj2061; 2002(5)WLC28; 2002(5)WLN264

..... article 227, the high court cannot interfere with the exercise of a discretionary power vested in the inferior court or tribunal, unless its finding or order is clearly perverse or patently unreasonable.15. so far as present case is concerned, the findings of the industrial tribunal are based on correct appreciation of law and facts. from perusing the award dtd. 4 ..... .6.99 (annex.5) passed by the industrial tribunal, udaipur, it does not appear that any flagrant violation of law has been made or there is patent irregularity or error of law apparent on the face of record or it cannot be said that the findings are perverse. therefore, all these factors are lacking in this case .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 08 2002 (HC)

Manoj Sahay and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

Decided on : Feb-08-2002

..... a tax is compensatory or not is to enquire whether the trades people are having the use of certain facilities for the better conduct of their business and paying not patently much more than what is required for providing the facilities. it would be impossible to judge the compensatory nature of a tax by a meticulous test, and in the nature .....

Tag this Judgment!


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