Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 2002 Page 6 of about 1,367 results (0.010 seconds)

Nov 20 2002 (HC)

Smt. Santilata Sahoo Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Nov-20-2002

Reported in : AIR2003Ori114

r.k. patra, j. 1. this letters patent appeal is directed against the order dated 28-6-2001 by which a learned single judge of this court has dismissed the appellant's writ petition.2. the appellant purchased .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2002 (HC)

Chief General Manager, Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of ...

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Oct-10-2002

Reported in : (2003)ILLJ381Ori; 2002(II)OLR632

p.k. balasubramanyan, c.j. 1. the petitioners in o.j.c. no. 1213 of 2000 on the file of this court are the appellants in this letters patent appeal. o.j.c. no. 1213 of 2000 was filed by the appellants seeking to quash the order of the industrial tribunal, orissa, bhubaneswar in i.d. case no. 65 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 2002 (HC)

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Siba Parida and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Nov-20-2002

Reported in : 2003(I)OLR231

r.k. patra, j.1. this letter patent appeal filed by the insurance company is directed against the order dated 28.8.1998 in misc. appeal no. 589 of 1991 by which the learned single judge has allowed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 2002 (HC)

Nilamani Behera and ors. Vs. Pyarilal Saha

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Feb-01-2002

Reported in : 2002(I)OLR303

..... the contract. it is thus being aggrieved by the dismissal of the suit that the legal representatives of the plaintiff have filed this appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent, as they had got themselves impleaded in the first appeal on the death of the plaintiff.2. the plaint schedule property including a partially constructed building, belonged to the plaintiff .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 2002 (HC)

Budhia Alias Budhadev Dalei Vs. State of Orissa

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Apr-18-2002

Reported in : 2002(I)OLR676

..... . w. 50 from that perspective the trial court confined its attention mainly to his statement so recorded and discredited him. this legal infirmity apart, factually also the trial court committed patent errors. as earlier noticed, one of the grounds for disbelieving him was that in the trip-sheet the name of the person who performed the journey, namely, a-l was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 23 2002 (HC)

Balavadra Das Vs. Sudhansu Sekhar Mishra and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Aug-23-2002

Reported in : 2002(II)OLR374

..... or defect in the appreciation of evidence adduced by the parties on the merits. that is why, even if the appreciation of evidence made by the lower appellate court is patently erroneous and the finding of fact recorded in consequence is grossly erroneous, that cannot be said to introduce a substantial error or defect in the procedure. on the other hand .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2002 (HC)

Rajan Rahaman Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Oct-10-2002

Reported in : 2002(II)OLR674

..... stood at rank 238 (medical stream) in the merit list of j.e.e. medical, 2001. in view of the submission made by the appellant, we dispose of this letters patent appeal directing the respondents to consider her case for admission to 1st year m.b.b.s. course for the present academic year without insisting production of green card, if .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 2002 (SC)

Madan Lal Vs. State of Punjab and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-01-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)AWC79(SC); (2003)1CALLT61(SC); JT2002(8)SC219; (2002)9SCC473a; (2003)1UPLBEC173

..... for the lands in question. still not satisfied, the appellants herein pursued the matter, on further appeal, before the division bench of the high court invoking the powers of letters patent. the learned judges of the division bench concurred with the conclusion arrived at by the learned single judge and rejected the appeals on the view that no interference was called ..... discretion and the manner of appreciation of evidence in the matter of determining the market value, unless the approach of the courts below and reasons assigned are found to be patently illegal, against settled principles or perverse or that the valuation was so unreasonably low as to warrant an interference in our hands or that it was not based on any ..... given by the learned single judge on the basis of relevant evidence which also found favour of acceptance at the hands of the division bench, we do no find any patent error of law or unreasonableness in the determination made by the high court in these cases, justifying our interference in the matter.7. for all the above reasons, we see .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 2002 (HC)

Om Prakash Tiwari and ors. Vs. the Election Commission

Court : Patna

Decided on : Apr-26-2002

..... of the constitution of india, if interference by high court thwarts or interferes with the election. the gamut of the petitioners argument is that in case of illegality or a patent illegality floating on the surface of the record, the same should be corrected under article 226 of the constitution of india by the high court, cannot be accepted. true it ..... instead of following the order of the division bench in the matter of ram ballav singh (supra). from the judgment of the supreme court, it would clearly appear that a patent legality in the order passed by the election officer or returning officer or election commission or a latent defect in the procedure cannot be challenged before the high court under ..... the returning officer. on the basis of this judgment, it is sought to be argued that in a given case of absolute illegality and absolute non-application of mind and patent breach of the provisions of law, the high court must interfere. i am unable to conceive to the said argument. in the matter of ram ballav singh's case, the ..... process but in the facts and circumstances an occasion had arisen to issue necessary directions. the correctness of the said judgment was questioned before the high court in a letters patent appeal by the state election commissioner. in the judgment reported in 2001 (3) pljr 677, after consideration of the relevant provisions of the bihar panchayat raj act, 1993 and the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2002 (HC)

Wyeth Laboratories Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-15-2002

Reported in : 2002(3)ALLMR70; 2002(5)BomCR761; 2002(143)ELT47(Bom)

..... such products manufactured in india were exempted from payment of the whole of the excise duty leviable thereon. consequently, there being no excise duty leviable on the said goods viz. patent and proprietary medicines manufactured in india, there could have been no levy of additional duty, as such the petitioners were entitled to claim refund of the same.19. so far ..... case, the petitioners had imported from netherlands various quantities of norgesterel u.s.p. ('the said goods', for short) during march, 1986 for manufacture of patent and proprietary medicines in india.3. upon arrival of the said goods in india, from time to time, during that period, the petitioners were required to pay the customs duty ..... , are as under :m/s. wyeth laboratories limited is the company, having its factory at ghatkopar, mumbai manufacturing pharmaceutical products (patent and proprietary medicines) falling under chapter 30 of the central excise tariff act, 1985. for the manufacture of said patent and proprietary medicines, the petitioners were required to import, from time to time, different kinds of bulk drugs. in the present .....

Tag this Judgment!


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