Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Year: 2005 Page 11 of about 1,498 results (0.013 seconds)

Jan 25 2005 (SC)

Maruti Udyog Ltd. Vs. Ram Lal and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-25-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC851; 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)405; [2005(104)FLR820]; JT2005(1)SC449; (2005)ILLJ853SC; (2005)2SCC638; 2005(2)SLJ358(SC); (2005)2UPLBEC1470

..... retrenchment of the workmen had become final and they had never challenged the same as in the other case.'8. aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment a letters patent appeal came to be filed by the respondents herein, which by reason of the impugned judgment was allowed reversing the aforementioned findings of the learned single judge.9. aggrieved, the ..... ) has vested in the appellant. it is aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by a division bench of the punjab and haryana high court in letters patent appeal no. 837 of 1995 whereby and whereunder a judgment and order passed by a learned single judge dated 19.4.1995 passed in c.w.p no. 15728 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 2005 (SC)

Bombay Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking Vs. Laffans (India) P ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-21-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC2486; 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)633; 2005(3)AWC2133(SC); 2005(2)BLJR1153; 2005(4)BomCR587; II(2005)CPJ6(SC); [2005(3)JCR76(SC)]; JT2005(4)SC538; RLW2005(3)SC380; (2005)4SCC3

..... , c.j.1. this appeal, by special leave, has been preferred against the judgment dated 10.3.1995 of the division bench of bombay high court, by which the letters patent appeal filed by first respondent, laffans (india) pvt. ltd. was allowed, the judgment dated 17.3.1993 of the learned single judge dismissing the writ petition was set aside and ..... challenged the notice of demand and disconnection by filing a writ petition which was dismissed by a learned single judge of the high court on 17.8.1993. the letters patent appeal preferred by the first respondent was allowed by the division bench and the demand notice was quashed.3. the learned single judge held that it was for the consumer .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 2005 (SC)

Umesh Korga Bhandari Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-08-2005

Reported in : [2005(106)FLR1007]; JT2005(7)SC270; (2005)IIILLJ531SC

..... that the respondent no. 1 mtnl had been held to be an industry and, therefore, without following the provisions of the id act termination could not have been directed. letters patent appeals were filed before the bombay high court. by the impugned judgment, the high court held that the reference under section 10 of the id act was not maintainable. it ..... arijit pasayat, j.1. challenge in these appeals is to the correctness of the judgment rendered by a division bench of the bombay high court allowing the letters patent appeal filed by the mahanagar telephone nigam limited (in short 'mtnl'), the respondent no. 1. the appellants were working in the canteens maintained by the departmental canteen committee. appellants questioned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 25 2005 (SC)

Surendranagar District Panchayat Vs. Dahyabhai Amarsinh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-25-2005

Reported in : AIR2006SC110; (2006)2CALLT99(SC); [2006(108)FLR193]; (2006)2GLR1014; JT2005(9)SC54; (2006)ILLJ424SC; 2005(8)SCALE631; (2005)8SCC750; 2006(2)SLJ121(SC); 2006(1)LC12(SC)

..... held that the workman had worked for 240 days in a year. the court also held that one junior was retained, whereas service of respondent was terminated. consequently, the letters patent appeal was dismissed. that is how the appellant has come before this court, challenging the order of reinstatement.4. it is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant-panchayat ..... workman with back wages of 20% from the date of reference for non-compliance of sections 25f, 25g and 25h.3. the learned single judge dismissed the petition. a letter patent appeal was filed and the division bench held that the labour court was right in holding that the workman by his oral statement had proved his case. not only that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 2005 (SC)

Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Major Bahadur Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-22-2005

Reported in : [2006(108)FLR146]; JT2005(10)SC127; 2005(9)SCALE459; (2006)1SCC368

..... chief of army staff, army headquarters, south block, new delhi, call in question legality of the judgment rendered by a division bench of the delhi high court in a letters patent appeal. the high court by the impugned judgment held that though the court cannot moderate the appraisal and grading given to an officer while exercising the power of judicial review ..... lieutenant colonel. it is to be noted that the writ petition filed by the respondent was dismissed by a learned single judge and the same was challenged in the letters patent appeal.2. background facts in a nutshell are as under:the respondent was considered for promotion to the rank of lieutenant colonel by the selection boards held in august 1995 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 2005 (HC)

Rajesh Kumar, Prop. Surya Trading Vs. the Deputy Commissioner, I. Tax

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-03-2005

Reported in : (2005)194CTR(Del)377; 117(2005)DLT559; [2005]275ITR641(Delhi)

..... a settled principle of law that while exercising its jurisdiction under article 226 of the constitution of india, this court does not sit as a court of appeal and a patent illegality or lack of inherent jurisdiction in passing the impugned action/letter would be a limited ground for invoking the jurisdiction of this court. having heard the counsel for petitioner ..... as well as examining the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the considered view that the letter dated 7.12.2004 does not suffer from a patent illegality or inherent lack of jurisdiction on the part of the assessing officer.7. there cannot be any dispute to the preposition that the competent authority under the provisions of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 01 2005 (HC)

D.D.A. and anr. Vs. K.R. Builders P. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-01-2005

Reported in : III(2005)BC511; 119(2005)DLT196; 2005(81)DRJ708

..... difference because the logic applied by the supreme court would apply more effectively to the original side rules of this court also which is not the creation of a letters patent but a statute enacted by the parliament. as such, no fine distinction or any hair-splitting can be made on the plea that this supreme court judgment was only limited ..... curt.10. the case before the supreme court was that the powers of the chartered high courts to make rules on its original side was itself derived from the letters patent and that the non-obstante clause in section 129 cpc could not be construed as a departure from the entire body of cpc so as to render the rules made .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 05 2005 (HC)

international Cargo Services Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through Secreta ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-05-2005

Reported in : 120(2005)DLT195; 2005(82)DRJ586; 2006(193)ELT546(Del)

..... remedy particularly when the order impugned in the writ petition is passed in violation to the provisions of the regulations and is also clearly against the principles of natural justice. patent violation of principles of natural justice or basic rule of law would vitiate the order and the proceedings in their entirety. in such circumstances, it may not be necessary for ..... necessary for the authorities and situation of emergent action existed, so as to compel them to invoke the provisions of regulation 20 (2). here, the impugned order suffers from dual patent infirmities. despite the fact that the matter was pretty old, no opportunity was granted to the petitioner of being heard and secondly there is no application of mind by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 2005 (HC)

Smt. Sarla Devi JaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through Under Secretary ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-07-2005

Reported in : AIR2006Delhi12; 121(2005)DLT426; 2005(83)DRJ377

..... no explanationn, much less a reasonable cause shown for condensation of delay in filing of the application. the application runs into 2 paragraphs of about 8 lines. the application is patently barred by time in which no cogent reasons have been stated for condoning the delay. the grounds taken in the review application are without any merits. an attempt is now ..... are beyond the purview and scope of provisions of order 47. we are unable to see any merit in the application which will persuade to hold that there is any patent error of law in the judgment under review, or that there are any additional grounds now pleaded in the review application which would justify recourse to such remedy. we may .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 2005 (HC)

Jagdish Preshad Gupta Vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-22 and ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-07-2005

Reported in : (2005)197CTR(Del)292; 122(2005)DLT178; 2005(83)DRJ372; [2006]283ITR585(Delhi)

..... 226 of the constitution of india unless the action complaint of the respondents is without jurisdiction, is on assumption of power not vested in the officer or the action is patently illegal or arbitrary. there cannot be an absolute principle of law that the jurisdiction of this court under article 226 of the constitution of india would be debarred further, there ..... competent authority on merits. the order of assessment would be passed upon reassessment and petitioner can also avail of the statutory remedy of appeal available to him. there is no patent error or illegality in the order passed by the authorities in issuing the notice under section 148 which has been issued upon due application to mind for good reasons and .....

Tag this Judgment!


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