Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 2002 Page 2 of about 1,367 results (0.010 seconds)

May 10 2002 (HC)

Jaininder JaIn and ors. Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-10-2002

Reported in : 2004(29)PTC160(Del)

..... 1 and 2 had put in appearance before learned single judge and in response to the notice issued in this appeal affidavit of mr. t.r. subramanian, controller general of patents, designs and trade marks was filed supported with documents. affidavit was also filed of shri amar prakash, assistant registrar trade marks, trade marks registry, mumbai. in the two affidavits, respondents ..... are the wives respectively of appellant no. 1 and respondents 3 and 4. respondent no. 1 is the registrar of trade marks. respondent no. 2 is the controller (general) of patents, designs and trade marks.3. the appellants have stated the background in which they claimed the reliefs saying that in the year 1959 appellant no. 2 established kangaro stationery industry .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 03 2002 (HC)

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Etc. Vs. Smt. Pushpa Devi and ors ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-03-2002

Reported in : AIR2003Raj63; 2003(2)WLN28

..... courts which included only judicature for bengal, madras. bombay. north west provinces (allahabad) and other like patna, lahore. rangoon. but no letters patent was handed over to the high court of state of rajasthan as neither, the state of rajasthan nor its high court was in existence when the ..... thereupon called writs close, literate clause and are recorded in the close-rolls, in the same manner as the orders are in the patent rolls.35. different letters patents have handed clown by the sovereign in british india to chartered high courts which included only judicature for bengal, madras, bombay. north ..... court as intra court appeal in the following circumstances :(i) as per the specific provisions contained in rajasthan high court ordinance:(ii) or letters patent act that were existing prior to commencement of the constitutionunder article 225.(iii) once an appeal reaches the high court, it has to be ..... bench. therefore, filing of appeal intra court within the high court as per the specific provisions contained in rajasthan high court ordinance or letters patent act that were existing prior to commencement of the constitution under article 225, would not alter the nature of decree passed by either of ..... the question raise by the court was in the following terms:'the question is whether remedy of intra court appeal provided under relevant letters patent or high court ordinance cases to be available in view of the provisions of section 54 of the land acquisition act. the question whether .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 2002 (HC)

N. Rangaswamy Vs. Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-29-2002

Reported in : 2003(26)PTC408(Mad)

..... the branch office of the respondent is situate within the jurisdiction of this court and as such, seeking leave under clause 12 of the letters patent is absolutely unnecessary. it is open to the respondent to establish by evidence during the course bf the trial about the non-existence of ..... which is outside the jurisdiction of the court and under the circumstance, the applicant ought to have taken leave under clause 12 of the letters patent. para 16 of the plaint relates to cause of action, wherein it is stated that the respondent continues to indulge in violations and making hectic ..... vandalism in petroleum tankers and also at the best price. the plaintiff cannot claim monopoly rights especially as the plaintiff does not have any registered patent in the alleged system. only in the reply affidavit, the plaintiff has for the first time claimed passing off. there is no whisper of ..... times commercial production of the articles by industrial process based on the drawings are made. abloy security limited are the proprietors of number of patents registered in us patent office as mentioned in para 'y'. the sealing of the tankers carrying petroleum products have been made mandatory by petroleum rules, 1976. the ..... based on the said system. the plaintiff having come to existence only in the year 1998, cannot claim any monopoly over the said patent. the life of the patent has long since expired and the technique involved has fallen into public domain and the system can now be used by any person. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 2002 (HC)

ipca Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Savita Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-26-2002

Reported in : 2002(6)BomCR696; 2002(4)MhLj407

..... the said right shall vest and alwaysdeemed to be vested with ipca.' at this stage it would be sufficient only tonotice that neither of the clauses mentions that thetrade marks, patents or processes belonged to theplaintiff.schedule ii to the agreement with 'gelsules'sets out 'appetone'...multivitamin capsules', as oneof the products to be manufactured. schedule ii tothe agreement with the ..... thepurpose of manufacturing and packing the products.clauses 4(xii) and 6(c) read as under :4(xii)'not to claim any right to or underany of the trade marks, patents or processesconnected with any of the products ormanufacture and/or sell any products under atrade mark connected with the products orunder a name phonetically or otherwise similarto trade names connected .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 04 2002 (TRI)

G.K. Kabra Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad

Decided on : Jun-04-2002

Reported in : (2003)87ITD249(Hyd.)

..... per the note given by him at page-10 of the paper-book vol. ii, he is recipient of various awards for inventions and product development, and there are 27 patents and designs to his credit. every member of his family is in industry and trade.2. the two units, kabsons industries, hosur and g.k. kabra enterprises, pune run lpg .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 2002 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax and anr. Vs. Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-19-2002

Reported in : (2003)182CTR(Kar)23; [2003]264ITR142(KAR); [2003]264ITR142(Karn)

..... only 50 per cent depreciation on depreciable assets acquired by it.question no. (v)--whether the assessee was entitled to claim any deduction on the alleged expenditure of acquisition of patent rights, copyrights and knowhow in terms of sections 35a and 34ab of the act.20. in our judgment rendered in income-tax appeal in ita no. 134/2000 and connected ..... any know-how. it is further clear that in this case, there was no patent right to be acquired. 'patent' is defined under the patents act, 1970, according to which only inventions can be patented. beedi rolling or beedi manufacturing is not an invention which can be patented or create any patent right. further, expenses on trade mark is not covered either under section 35a or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 03 2002 (HC)

Smart Chip Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-03-2002

Reported in : AIR2003All80

..... protect and encourage the indian business class viz-a-vis the foreign business class. hence, the grant of the contract in question to a patent holder of a foreign corporation goes against the spirit of article 19(1)(g) and the tender conditions appear to be directed to create monopoly ..... party viz. the respondent no. 3 which is the sole value added reseller of drexler technology or corporation, usa which has got propriety and sole patent right for the optical technology worldwide. in our opinion, the whole effort of the state government was to benefit the respondent no. 3 which ..... allotted to value added reseller. it is alleged that the system of distribution of products fully patented as per the us patent law and wto agreement is bound to create 100 vendor dependence of the states and therefore create a monopoly in favour of such ..... guidelines. 20. in paragraph 29 of the writ petition it is alleged that laser card corporation, a 100 subsidiary company of drexier technology corporation, patent holder of smart optical card technology in usa. distributes its products to the end-users through sole value added resellers system in the territory defined/ ..... the writ petition it is alleged that the technology for optical card is proprietary of one drexier technology corporation of usa which is the sole patent rights holder worldwide. a profile of the drexier technology corporation of usa is annexure p-10 to the writ petition. the laser card system .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 23 2002 (HC)

Mr. Ashwani Kumar Sharma Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-23-2002

Reported in : (2003)IILLJ575Del; 2003(3)SLJ405(Delhi)

..... bench decision of this court as also the supreme court of india.65. for the reasons afore-mentioned, we are of the opinion that the writ petition and the letter patents appeal should be allowed and it must be held that the petitioners and the appellant are entitled to the benefit of the pension scheme. the retiral benefits payable to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2002 (HC)

Escotal Mobile Communications Ltd. Vs. Union of India

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Feb-15-2002

Reported in : [2002]123TAXMAN134(Ker)

..... to transfer or succession, and to their capacity of being injured. property includes not only ownership, estates, and interests in corporeal things, but also rights such as trade marks, copyrights, patents, and rights in persona capable of transfer or transmission, such as debts.' (page 117)the supreme court reiterated its own view in the decision in h. anraj v. government of ..... the contention, in view of the decision in vikas sales corpns case (supra). even the learned counsel was not able to contend that sale of a copy right or a patent right, though sale of intangible property would not attract sales tax.38. mr. menon then contended that activation charges were separately billed and there was no consideration for activation charges .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 2002 (TRI)

Ultra Filter (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Decided on : Apr-12-2002

Reported in : (2002)(145)ELT362Tri(Bang.)

..... they had cleared 'filters' with the brand name of m/s ultra filter gmbh, germany by suppressing the fact of having entered into technical collaboration with the german company, using patents and affixing the brand name of the collaborator company, who were not eligible for the exemption of notification no, 175/86. this activity was alleged to be with an intention .....

Tag this Judgment!

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