Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: copyright act 1957 section 73 · Page 1 of about 246 results (0.034 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Sep 02 2011

M/S. Divya Exports. Vs. M/S. Shalimar Video Company, and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-02-2011

Subject : Civil

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 ; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 41 Rule 24; Indian Trusts Act 1881 - Section 73, 74

dated 14.8.2001 executed by M. Srinivasa Rao in favour of respondent No.1, referred to the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957, two judgments of the Madras High Court and concluded that the plaintiff has failed to make out a … light of the specific ground taken by the plaintiff in this appeal with regard to the application of Section 73 of the Indian Trusts Act 1881 (for short the Trusts Act ), I deem it absolutely necessary to

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 21 1995

Zahir Ahmed Vs. Azam Khan

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Sep-21-1995

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 14, 17, 44, 45, 51, 55, 72, 73, 74, 78 and 79; ;Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 13, 14, 16, 17, 27, 44, 45, 48, 53A and 63; ;Partnership Act - Section 69; ;Copyright Rules, 1958 - Rules 16, 17 and 27; ;Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 156(3) and 482; ;Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 156(3), 415, 420 and 511

Reported in : 1996CriLJ290

under Sections 78 and 79 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957, read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, and had prayed before him (learned Magistrate) for directing … revision.24. Realising the difficulty somewhat tardily, the learned Advocate for the petitioner, referring to Sections 44, 45, 72, 73 and 74 of the Act, read with Rules 16, 17 and 27 of the Copyright Rules, 1958 sought

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 12 2005

K. Sevanthinatha Pandarasannathi Vs. Government of Tamilnadu, Rep. by ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-12-2005

Subject : Trusts and SocietiesConstitution

Acts : Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 - Sections 26 and 71(1); Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 - Sections 26; Copyrights Act, 1957; Indian Passport Act; Tamil Nadu (Exhibition of Films on Television Screen) Regulation Act, 1984 - Sections 9(2); Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Amendment) Act, 1994; Rice Milling Industries Act, 1958; Foreigners Act, 1946 - Sections 3 and 3(2); Insolvency Act, 1920 - Sections 73; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19, 21, 246, 254 and 254(2)

Reported in : 2005(5)CTC81; (2006)1MLJ134

Television Screen) Regulation Act 1984 cannot be regarded as a legislation on copyright itself, falling under List-I. The Tamil Nadu Act was held to be … Act was held to be only a regulatory provision and not repugnant to the provisions under the Copyrights Act 1957. In contrast, in the case on hand before us, while the Central Act does not contemplate any disqualification … Act. Insolvency is a statutory disqualification on adjudication under the provisions of the Insolvency Act 1920 and under Section 73 of the said Act on declaration, an insolvent becomes disqualified to hold any public office or being elected

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Oct 14 2004

Shalimar Video Company, Rep. by Its Partner Mr. Mohd. Ashraf Vs. Divya ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-14-2004

Subject : PropertyIntellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 14, 19(2) and 51; Indian Trusts Act, 1882 - Sections 73 and 74; Civil Practice Rules - Rule 32; Cinematograph Act - Sections 2; Bombay Cinemas (Regulations) Act, 1953; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 41, Rule 24

Reported in : 2004(6)ALD447; 2004(6)ALT244

suit schedule films.29. According to Sri Srinivasa Reddy, learned Counsel for respondents, as per Section 19(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 (for short 'the Copyright Act') which deals with mode of assignment, the rights assigned must be specific, and … light of the specific ground taken by the plaintiff in this appeal with regard to the application of Section 73 of the Indian Trusts Act 1882 (for short 'the Trusts Act'), I deem it absolutely necessary to formulate

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 22 2010

Music Choice India Private Limited Vs. Phonographic Performance Limite ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-22-2010

Subject : CivilIntellectual Property Rights

Acts : Companies Act, 1956; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 19A, 30, 31, 31(1), 33(3), 44, 49, 51, 63, 72, 73 and 74; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 345 and 346

under the Companies Act, 1956 and has been registered as a Collecting Society under Section 33(3) of the Copyright Act, 1957 ('The Act' for short) to carry on the business of issuing licenses inter alia to broadcast / communicate … within whose jurisdiction the Appellant actually and voluntarily resides or carried on business or personally works for gain.Section 73 deals with the procedure for appeals whereas Section 74 of the Act states that the register of Copyrights

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 07 2011

The Federation of Hotels and Restaurants Association of IndiA. Vs. Uni ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-07-2011

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2(ff), 13, 33(3), 34(3), 34, 78, 2(dd), 1 (2), 35 - Chapter 14 ; Constitution of India - Articles 226, 14, 19(1)(g), 12 ;

of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ striking down Sections 2(ff), 13, 33(3), 34(3) of the Copyright Act, 1957 as these provisions are perceived by the Petitioners as being violative of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the … filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ striking down Sections 2(ff), 13, 33(3), 34(3) of the Copyright Act, 1957 as these provisions are perceived by the Petitioners as … the strength of Federal Bank Ltd. vs- Sagar Thomas, (2003) 10 SCC 733, wherein the Supreme Court has laid down that the existence of merely

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 03 2006

Modern Food Industries (i) Limited Vs. Modern Bakery and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-03-2006

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 20(1), 29 and 34; ;Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2 and 48

Reported in : 2006(4)CHN65,2007(34)PTC504(Cal)

company by its advertising agency for valuable consideration and is an original artistic work within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act, 1957 of which copyright vests exclusively with the said company.8. The said company … was registered as a copyright in favour of the company being No. A-9291/73 under the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957.5. The said company expanded its activities over time from one production unit in 1956 to 14 bakery units

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 30 2015

Ferani Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State Information Commissioner and Oth ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-30-2015

Subject : Right to Information

the 3rd respondent. The contention of the petitioner is that as per Section 2 (1) (c) of the Copyright act 1957, in the plans submitted by the petitioners there subsists a copyright, and thus disclosure of such information would … Court Cases 355); (2) State Bank of India vs Ramchandra Dubey and ors (2001) 1 Supreme Court Cases 73) (3) Reliance Industries Ltd vs. Gujarat State Information Commissioner and ors (AIR 2007 GUJARAT 2003)(4) Harish Kumar vs

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 02 2017

F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd & Anr vs.dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd & ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-02-2017

Subject : MRTP

Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and the Copyright Rules, 1959 in exercise of powers under Section 73 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Though Section 158 of the Patents Act also empowers this Court to make rules as to the conduct

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 02 2017

f.hoffmann-la-roche Ltd. & Anr vs.natco Pharma Limited

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-02-2017

Subject : MRTP

Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and the Copyright Rules, 1959 in exercise of powers under Section 73 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Though Section 158 of the Patents Act also empowers this Court to make rules as to the conduct

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial