Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 2004 Page 9 of about 1,374 results (0.010 seconds)

Jun 18 2004 (HC)

Babaji Charan Sahu and ors. Vs. Rajendra Narayan Dash and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Jun-18-2004

Reported in : AIR2004Ori160; 98(2004)CLT526

..... legal heirs and successors of the original plaintiff nityananda sahu in title suit no. 163 of 1969 instituted in the court of the subordinate judge, cuttack have preferred this letters patent appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 8th september, 1988 passed by a learned single judge of this court in first appeal no. 188 of 1974.2. the ..... and decree passed by the court below and dismissed the suit. the said judgment and decree passed by the learned single judge of this court are impugned in this letters patent appeal as stated above.9. the findings of the trial court on almost all the issues stands confirmed having not been challenged before the first appellate court. the only issue .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 2004 (HC)

Court on Its Own Motion Vs. Ajay Bansal and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-11-2004

Reported in : 2004CriLJ2601

..... judicial system of the two states and union territory, chandigarh. unfortunately, those involved in the printing and publication of the newspaper acted in a most irresponsible manner by allowing a patently false news item to be published least realising that the same would cause irreparable damage to the constitutional institution of judiciary, they should realise that their irresponsible and abrasive actions ..... :--'on the basis of above discussion, we hold that the news item in question was concocted and published with the clear intention to scandalise the entire judiciary by making a patently false and mischievous assertion that a judge of the high court was connected with the corruption case registered against the two members of subordinate judiciary and his name has been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 15 2004 (HC)

Scheduled Castes Co-op. Society Vs. State of Punjab and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-15-2004

Reported in : AIR2005P& H100; (2005)139PLR665

..... chinder pal by way of civil writ petition. that writ petition was allowed and the impugned order was quashed. against the order of learned single judge, the state filed letters patent appeal. learned counsel, who appeared in support of this appeal, urged that the land, subject matter of allotment to attu ram, was not nazool land and that the same was ..... , the sale was set aside as violative of the revenue code, rule-43(5). the appellant carried an appeal before the appellate authority, thereafter, a writ petition and then letters patent appeal and when he met with no success, present appeal came to be filed before the supreme court. it was urged on behalf of the appellants that the prohibition for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 2004 (SC)

Jamshed Hormusji Wadia Vs. Board of Trustees, Port of Mumbai and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-13-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC1815; 2004(176)ELT24(SC); JT2004(1)SC232; 2004(1)SCALE341; (2004)3SCC214

..... interveners with regard to the 'compromise proposals' that are submitted by the port trust and consider the same on merits. it will be open to the respondents in the letters patent appeals before the high court as well as the interveners to agitate the points which were agitated before the learned single judge and which have been decided against them by ..... the learned single judge. if any of the appellants in these appeals had not intervened before the high court in letters patent appeals still will be open to him to move the high court for intervention.'(emphasis supplied)8. the matter reached back and has been disposed of afresh vide the impugned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 2004 (SC)

M.P. Vidyut Karamchari Sangh Vs. M.P. Electricity Board

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-18-2004

Reported in : [2004(101)FLR670]; JT2004(3)SC423; (2004)IILLJ470SC; 2004(3)SCALE383; (2004)9SCC755; 2004(2)SLJ414(SC); (2004)2UPLBEC1313

..... as writ petition no. 7255 of 2000. the said writ petition was dismissed by a learned single judge of the high court where against the appellant herein preferred a letters patent appeal marked as letters patents appeal no. 34 of 2001. by reason of the impugned judgment dated 11.9.2001, the division bench dismissed the said appeal.high court

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2004 (SC)

N. Bhargavan Pillai (Dead) by Lrs. and anr. Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-20-2004

Reported in : AIR2004SC2317; 2004CriLJ2494; JT2004(Suppl1)SC194; 2004(2)KLT725(SC); 2004(4)SCALE693

..... relating to entrustment and mis-appropriation in our view are well merited and fully justified on the basis of evidence on record and do not suffer from any perversity or patent error of law to warrant interference.14. coming to the plea relating to benefits under the probation act, it is to be noted that section 18 of the said act .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 2004 (SC)

Divisional Manager, Plantation Division, Andaman and Nicobar Islands V ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-17-2004

Reported in : 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)212; 2005(1)AWC605(SC); (SCSuppl)2005(2)CHN74; 2005(3)ESC335; [2005(104)FLR375]; [2005(1)JCR220(SC)]; JT2005(11)SC530; (2005)ILLJ557SC; (2005)2SCC237; 2005(

..... respondent-workmen were proved beyond doubts. i, therefore, do not incline to interfere with the impugned award passed by the tribunal. i, accordingly, dismiss this writ petition.'8. a letters patent appeal there against was preferred before the division bench which was barred by limitation, as a delay of 103 days occurred in filing the same. as indicated hereinbefore, the delay ..... of 2001 (m.a.t. no. 12 of 2001) whereby and whereunder an application for condonation of 103 days' delay in filing an appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent of the calcutta high court was not condoned as also an order dated 10.10.2001 passed by another bench of the said high court refusing to review the said .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 16 2004 (HC)

Mr. D.M. Talwar Vs. Delhi Development Authority

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jan-16-2004

Reported in : 109(2004)DLT514; 2004(72)DRJ747

..... v. union of india : 1978crilj1281a . in the leading judgment it has been observed that mechanics of price fixation have necessarily to be left to the executive and unless it is patent that there is hostile discrimination against a class the rocessual basis of price fixation has to be accepted in the generality of cases as valid.'' 7.2 the next case ..... expressed by the larger bench in sheela wanti case (supra).'' 7.5 clearly, the mechanics of price fixation have necessarily to be left to the executive and unless it is patent that there is hostile discrimination against a class the processual basis of price fixation has to be accepted in the generality of cases as valid. in this case such no .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 2004 (HC)

National Building Construction Corporation Limited Vs. Decor India Pvt ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-06-2004

Reported in : 2004(2)ARBLR1(Delhi); III(2004)BC139; 111(2004)DLT146; 2004(74)DRJ159

..... industrial undertakings act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the act) by awarding compound interest of 18% p.a at monthly rests, which according to the learned counsel is clearly and patently illegal. i have considered the said submission of the counsel appearing for the petitioner also. 11.counsel appearing for the respondent , however, submitted that the respondent being a registered small ..... cannot assume jurisdiction to award an increased rate. accordingly, the aforesaid part of the award, which granted increased rate by the arbitrator, cannot be sustained as it suffers from a patent error and, thereforee, the said part of the award is set aside and quashed.10.the next contention, as raised by the counsel appearing for the petitioner, was that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 2004 (HC)

Dr. Babu Lal Meghwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-03-2004

Reported in : [2005(104)FLR1184]

..... are based on correct appreciation of entire evidence and material available on record and it cannot be said that the findings of the learned tribunal are erroneous or perverse or patently unreasonable or based on no material or evidence. it also cannot be said that the learned tribunal committed any illegality in holding the transfer of the petitioner as valid and ..... of india, the high court cannot interfere with the exercise of a discretionary power vested in the inferior court or tribunal, unless its findings or order is clearly perverse or patently unreasonable.17. for the reasons mentioned above, no interference in called for with the impugned order dated 30.9.2004 (annexure 4) and the judgment dated 7.10.2004 (annexure .....

Tag this Judgment!

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