Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: pepsu court of wards act 2008 bk Sorted by: old Page 10 of about 918 results (0.106 seconds)

Mar 20 2008 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Biswanath Agarwal

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2008(3)CHN401

..... case may be. the number of packages stated therein, shall lie on the consignor, the consignee or the endorse, (highlighting by court)9. section 78 of the railways act, 1989 authorises the railways to remeasure or reweigh any consignment before its delivery. thus, under the provisions of section 78, the ..... and ors. reported in : (1999)illj200sc , relied upon by mr basu, where the apex court was dealing with a case of exercise of power under section 35(3) of the bihar university act for the purpose of termination of service on the ground that the appointment was irregular or unauthorised. ..... in the concerned statute, there was no provision for giving notice to the employee concerned. in such a situation, the supreme court made the following observations:in ..... from the nature of the power - particularly when the right of a party is affected adversely. the justification for reading such a requirement is that the court merely supplies omission of the legislature, (vide mohinder singh gill v. chief election commissioner : [1978]2scr272 ) and except in case of direct legislative ..... exists a weighbridge.since the view, we propose to take, is in direct conflict with the one taken by another division bench of this court in the case mentioned earlier, we refer this matter to the hon'ble chief justice for constituting a larger bench for resolving the following .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 2008 (HC)

Rana Steels Vs. Ran India Steels Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2008(102)DRJ503; LC2008(3)62; 2008(37)PTC24(Del)

..... case at this preliminary stage, it cannot be held that the plaintiff's alleged infringement action is not maintainable. consequently, the argument that this court does not have jurisdiction would have to be rejected.infringement:18. the plaintiff has alleged that its mark rana which is registered in respect of ..... defendant had itself stated that it is the leading manufacturer of building materials in india. thereforee, it was contended by mr. bansal that this court has jurisdiction both in respect of the infringement action and in respect of the passing off action.the defendant's further arguments:14. mr. sudhir ..... alleged by the plaintiff, or not, as contended by the defendant, is not a matter for consideration before this court. for the present, in view of section 31 of the said act, the registration of the trade mark is prima facie evidence of its validity. so, considering the defendant's registration ..... . he drew my attention to paragraph 26 of the plaint where it is stated that this court has territorial jurisdiction to try and adjudicate the present suit inasmuch as the defendant's impugned acts of infringement and passing off are taking place in delhi. it is also alleged that the ..... 2) of the said act would not be available to the plaintiff. the further argument is that in respect of the alleged passing off action nothing has happened in delhi as the defendant has neither sold nor offered its products for sale in delhi and, thereforee, this court would not have territorial .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 2008 (HC)

Sardara Singh and ors. Vs. the Financial Commissioner and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2008)151PLR297

..... learned single judge were:(i) provision of section 11(7) would be attracted to all cases of surplus area declared under the punjab law, pepsu law or this act but it envisages that stage of determining by snapping or de-linking the ties of the landowner by divesting him of the possession and title ..... area had to be determined again in the hands of the heirs of the original landowner. the collector had placed reliance upon the decision of the supreme court in bhikoba shankar v. mohan lal punchand : [1982]3scr218 , a case under the maharashtra law wherein it had been held that the proceedings could not ..... state of flux and there would be no finality.24. the learned counsel, taking a clue from ajmer kaur's case, argued that the supreme court had not finally interpreted the provision of section 11(7) because the matter was decided on the basis of the collector's order which had attained finality ..... determination is the stage when calculation of surplus area has been completed, whether by the collector or in appeal/revision by the hierarchy of the revenue courts upto the financial commissioner. it would be only when the remedy of final appeal/revision has been exhausted that it could be said that surplus area ..... on to every piece of their holding and did not surrender even a fraction of an acre, without a legal fight right up to the supreme court. therefore, the question which arises in the mind is; which is that precise moment when the landowner well and truly gets divested of his surplus .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 2008 (HC)

Pepsu Road Transport Corpn. Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR2008P& H155

..... transport authority to invite fresh applications for grant of surrendered permits. in support of his contention, the learned counsel relied upon the decision of a division bench of this court in cwp no. 1402 of 2003, titled amloh bus service (regd.) gobindgarh v. state of commissioner, decided on 24-5-2003. the learned counsel further submitted ..... decided on 27-3-2006 (supra), even then those appellants cannot be granted those permits on the monopoly route on regular basis.9. the division bench judgment of this court in cwp no. 18713 of 2003, titled amloh bus service (regd.) v. state of punjab, decided on 27-3-2006 (supra), as relied upon by counsel ..... said permit till such time the route is advertised afresh. in support of his contention, the learned counsel relied upon another decision of a division bench of this court in cwp no. 18713 of 2003, titled amloh bus service (regd) v. state of punjab, decided on 27-3-2006.8. after hearing the arguments of ..... the petitioner corporation.5. learned counsel for the petitioner corporation submitted that the impugned order passed by the appellate tribunal is totally contrary to the provisions of the act as well as the statutory transport scheme dated 9-8-1990, formulated and approved by the state. learned counsel submitted that undisputedly, a portion of the ..... order1. the pepsu road transport corporation, patiala (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner corporation') has filed this writ petition under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 2008 (SC)

Prachi Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2008(128)ECC20; 2008(154)LC20(SC); 2008(225)ELT16(SC); JT2008(4)SC415; 2008(4)SCALE745; 2009[16]STR222; [2007]14STT161; 2008AIRSCW2860

..... ) has no application to the facts of the present case. in the case of hindustan poles (supra) the question which arose for determination before this court was : whether joining of duty- paid pipes of different diameters by the assessee by welding would amount to manufacture. it was held that even after welding ..... which decided the matter in favour of the assessee. 15. applying the above tests in the context of section 2(f) of the 1944 act, we are of the view that in the present case the rotary swaging machine with different dies therein imparts a change of lasting character to ..... question which arises for determination in this batch of civil appeals is:whether swaging constitutes manufacture in terms of section 2(f) of the 1944 act?5. at the outset, it may be reiterated that ms tubes bought by the assessee from its manufacturers falls under heading 73.06 and the ..... tubes from its manufacturers. the said ms tubes are classified under heading 73.06 of the schedule to the central excise and tariff act, 1985 (for short, '1985 act'). after receiving ms tube from the manufacturers, the assessee cuts the same into requisite lengths. the cut ms tube is thereafter put in ..... may clarify that our judgment in this case is based on interpretation of the word 'manufacture' as defined in section 2(f) of 1944 act. with the introduction of 1985 act, the definition of 'manufacture' has been substituted to include 'any process - incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured product'. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 2008 (HC)

Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. Shri Shiv Khullar and anr.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2008(2)ARBLR42(Delhi)

..... morality or is patently illegal, the same has to be set aside. 17. a commonly held belief that while considering objections under section 34 of the act the court cannot look into the evidence before the arbitrator also needs to be clarified. there is a difference in re-appreciating evidence and considering whether material evidence has ..... finding as under:in the present case, the petitioner company is assailing the said award on merits, which is beyond the purview of this court under section 34 of the arbitration act.12. on the basis of the afore-noted finding vide impugned order(s) dated 2.3.2006 learned trial judge dismissed the objections ..... record that it is impermissible to assail an award on merits is patently illegal. probably, the learned judge intends to say that it is impermissible for the court to re-appreciate the evidence while considering a challenge to the award. indeed, shri v.m. issar, learned counsel for the respondent sought to urge that ..... placed before the arbitrator and as such, is perverse and is liable to be set aside to the extent challenged in these proceedings.11. noting the judgments of the supreme court in konkan railway corporation and ors. v. mehul construction co. : air2000sc2821 and olympus superstructure pvt. ltd. v. meena vijay hetan and ors. : [1999]3scr490 ..... are restored for fresh decision in accordance with law. 23. parties are directed to appear before the learned district & sessions judge on 19.5.2008. 24. no costs. 25. tcr be returned forthwith. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 2008 (HC)

J.B. Khanna and Company Vs. S. Asad

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 2008(5)MhLj1469; LC2008(3)19

..... plaintiff has not proved his copyright in the photographs by adducing any acceptable evidence and that the original transparency relied on by the respondent/plaintiff has not been produced in court and that the suit photographs lake louis and the tiger drinking water are common objects and any one can take the said photographs as no copyright is involved and that ..... to take from another for the purpose of saving labour is one of the ingredients to be found against the defendant. as a matter of fact, the object of copyright act is to protect the commercial value of productive effort, the individuals mind intended to protect all intellectual property capable of extensive reproduction. copyright is transmissible by assigning, by testamentary ..... brady and ors. v.chemical process equipments p. ltd. and anr. , it is laid down as follows:civil p.c. (5 of 1908), order39, rules 1 and 2 - copyright act (14 of 1957), section 55 - infringement of copyright - application for injunction restraining defendants from dealing in machines which were substantial imitation of plaintiff's unit - striking general similarity between defendant ..... copyright or trade mark 'camlin flora'.25. he also relied mostt. rajwati devi and anr. v.the joint director, consolidation, govt. of bihar, wherein it is held as follows:evidence act (1 of 1872), section 61 - documents upon which reliance is placed - must be brought on record legally - documents do not prove themselves - passing of order on basis of documents - .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 2008 (HC)

Sunil S/O Eknath Patil Alias Chaudhary Vs. the State of Maharashtra (N ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(5)ALLMR376; 2008(4)BomCR653; 2008(5)MhLj436

..... . dabholkar, j.1. feeling aggrieved about the manner of implementation of government guidelines pertaining to appointment of project affected persons (pap for short), the petitioner has approached this court with prayer for threefold relief as under:(a) quash and set aside the requirement of submitting an application and competing with other candidates as provided in the advertisement dated 17 ..... , for which candidates are not available. (c) prohibiting the respondents and other authorities referred in section 10-6(a) and (b) of maharashtra project affected persons rehabilitation act, 1999 (act xi of 2001 for short) from filling in at least 5% posts in c and d category mentioned in the said sub-clauses, except from the category of project ..... is filed by shri abhijit bhande, working as tahsildar, raver, district jalgaon on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3, on 30.1.2008 and another reply is filed after arguments were over, on 29.2.2008 by shri sanjay bagade, chitnis (tahasildar), collector office, jalgaon. according to respondents, government has issued detailed instructions and guidelines for appointment of pap ..... radio, television and employment news bulletins; and then consider the cases of all the candidates who have applied.it must be taken into consideration that the honourable the apex court was dealing with general procedure for selection and appointment. it took a note of mischief at the level of employment exchange and, therefore, expressed that the candidates sponsored by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 2008 (SC)

State of Karnataka and anr. Vs. Sri R. Vivekananda Swamy

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2008SC2080; [2008(117)FLR1044]; JT2008(4)SC553; 2008(4)KarLJ477; (2008)5MLJ414(SC); 2008(6)SCALE261; (2008)5SCC328; 2008AIRSCW2777; 2008(2)Supreme821; 2008(4)AIRKarR4

..... of rajasthan submitted that having regard to the rules framed by the states, the validity whereof is not being in question and in fact having been upheld by this court, the high courts of karnataka and rajasthan committed serious errors in issuing the impugned directions. 11. mr. bhat, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent in karnataka case, would, on ..... is possible to draw a distinction on the basis of several factors, emergent situation being one of them. so viewed, we do not find that the state of karnataka had acted arbitrarily. 21. rajasthan case, however, involves some disputed questions of fact. aay upadhyay was a judicial officer. indisputably he was suffering from a serious disease. the contention ofthe state is ..... . : (2006)8scc671 pitta naveen kumar and ors. v. raja narasaiah zangiti and ors. : (2006)10scc261 ].20. it, however, goes without saying that while exercising such a power, the authority must act judiciously keeping in mind the purport and object thereof. considerations therefor, although may not partake a mathematical exactable but should always be fair and reasonable. although it may not be ..... private ward rs. 500/- per dayaboverule 14 specifies as to how and in what manner, the reimbursement of medical expenses is to be carried out. rule 15 provides for claims for reimbursement of medical charges. rule 31 empowers the government to relax the provisions of the said rules. 8. the judgment of the tribunal, which was affirmed by the high court, was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 2008 (HC)

Unibic Biscuits India Pvt. Ltd. Rep. by Its Managing Director Vs. Brit ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : LC2008(3)347; 2008(4)KCCRSN275; 2008(4)AIRKarR417; AIR2008NOC2496; 2008AIHC3005(Kar)

..... to the appellant to do the same wrong knowing fully well that what it is doing is 'wrong' in the eye of law. the appellant cannot take shelter under an act committed by the plaintiff-respondent with regard to a different subject-matter. as regards the subject matter involved in the present suit, prima facie it appears that the plaintiff-respondent ..... iv add! city chni and sessions judge, mayohall unit, bangalore.2. the facts of the case are that the appellant and respondent arc the companies incorporated under the indian companies act and are the manufacturers and marketing the bakery items i.e., biscuits/cookies. the plaintiff-respondent is a registered proprietor of the trademark 'good day', the plaintiff had also design ..... disposal of the suit.22. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the court below is directed to dispose of the suit on or before 30/08/2008. both the parties are directed to appear before the court below on 26/05/2008 and co-operate with the court below to dispose of the suit expeditiously.any observations made in this appeal shall not ..... expired on 03-04-2007 and without bringing the same to the notice of the trial court the plaintiff claimed that the registration is still valid and subsisting. it is brought to the notice of the court that section 2[1][w] of the trade marks act 1999, provides that 'registered trade mark means a trade mark which is actually on the register .....

Tag this Judgment!


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