Advanced Search Results

A (Fc) and Others (Fc) (Appellants) Vs. Secretary of State for the Hom ...

Court : House of Lords

Subject : MRTP

shores and depart to another country, perhaps a country as close as France, there to pursue his criminal designs, is hard to reconcile with a belief in his capacity to inflict serious injury to the people and … but were not in the event called upon. The background 5. In July 2000 Parliament enacted the Terrorism Act 2000. This was a substantial measure, with 131 sections and 16 Schedules, intended to overhaul, modernise and strengthen the … 2. Eight of the appellants were certified by the Home Secretary under section 21 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 on 17 or … LJJ) made on 25 October 2002 ([2002] EWCA Civ 1502, [2004] QB 335). The Court of Appeal allowed the Home Secretary's appeal against the decision

G.Raghu Babu vs Muralikrishnan

Court : Chennai

his novel and innovative design vide application No. 297504 in class 12-05 dated 13/09/2017 under the provisions of Designs Act, 2000. The said design registration is valid till 2.9. Hence, it is clear that the Appellant is the proprietor … Vinoth Brick Works, Z-275, 5th Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 047. ... RespondentsAppeal Suit is filed under Section 96 r/w. Order XLI, Rule 1 and 2 of Civil Procedure Code praying to set aside the judgment

Dart Industries Inc. and anr. Vs. Techno Plast and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 4, 11, 18, 19, 20, 22, 22(2)(3), 22(3) and 29; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13, 14, 15, 17, 45, 51, 53 and 55; Designs Rules, 2001; Designs Act, 1911; Patent Act; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2

Reported in : 2007(35)PTC285(Del)

this case who have filed this suit for permanent injunction against the defendants under Section 22 of the Designs Act, 2000 read with Section 55 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The plaintiff No. 1 is a company incorporated under … CRYSTALWAVE 188562/Dt-26-03-2002 4, 69, 37, 62, 79 --DIVIDED BOWL Pg 121 93, 855. CONTAINER- 185951/Dt-5-07-2001 22, 23, 17, 33, 12, 34MODULAR MATE Pg 123 24, 25, 64, 73ROUND 81, 97, 98, 956. CONTAINER- 172740/Dt-29-11-1996 30, 31, 32

Lupin Ltd. and Another Vs. Johnson and Johnson and Another

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property

Trademarks Act with the provisions of the Designs Act and the Patents Act. It is submitted that the Designs Act, 2000 [Section 22(4) read with Section 19] and the Patents Act [Section 10 read with Section 64] (unlike Trademarks Act) … the date of registration.” Section 32 provides for protection of registration on ground of distinctiveness in certain cases. Section 33 for effect of acquiescence and Section 34 saves certain vested rights. Section 35 saves for bona fide use

Management of Cipla Ltd. Vs. Jayakumar R. and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Industrial Disputes Act - Sections 33A

Reported in : (1998)ILLJ460SC

with inter-departmental transfers - held, clauses of Section 33-A are not attracted and transfer Order is valid. - DESIGNS ACT, 2000 -- Section 19: [A.K. Mathur & Altamas Kabir, JJ] Cancellation of registration Held, Where the design applied to

Microforms Inc Vs. Girdhar and Co. and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13(1), 14, 15, 15(2), 40, 48 and 51; ;Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2 and 2(5); Designs Act, 1911; ;Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2 and 2(1); ;Patents Act; ;Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 479; ;Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 15

Reported in : 128(2006)DLT238; 2006(32)PTC157(Del)

that the artistic works are actually designs relating to textile products and come within the scope of the Designs Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Designs Act, 2000). The plaintiff has failed to apply for registration of designs … in K.C. Bokadia and Anr. v. Dinesh Chandra Dubey 1999 (1) M 33 LJ 33 has observed that there is no legislative intent to make … The plaintiff has claimed that the artistic work constitutes original artistic work as defined within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act. The plaintiff also claims that it enjoys copyright protection in India as a

The Management of Best and Crompton Engineering Limited Vs. A.M.Sekar ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 2-A(2), 17B, 25-N, 33

Manager in the year 1995 and promoted as Manager in the year 2000. 7.2. The Management has stated in the counter affidavit before the Labour … is stated that the Management has given effect to the order of termination without applying for permission under Section 33 of the Act and according to the employee, his last drawn wage was ` 9,950/-. It is also … Management, which is the respondent in I.D.No.739 of 2002, that the employee has joined on 4.5.1981 and was designated as a Clerk and he has accepted promotion from the non management cadre to the management cadre. It

Micolube India Limited Vs. Rakesh Kumar Trading as Saurabh Industries ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property

suit for infringement of registered design is maintainable against the another registered proprietor of the design under the Designs Act, 2000; (2) Whether there can be availability of remedy of passing off in the absence of express saving or … whether the registration is prima facie evidence of validity. The question under reference rather invites the construction of Section 22 of the Design Act, 2000 so as to discern whether it permits a suit for infringement of

Atul Narsibhai Patel Vs. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs a ...

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Land Acquisition

combination of known In other words, the cancellation was allowed in view of Section 4 (C) of the Designs Act, 2000. The subject matter of dispute before the Assistant Controller was ‘seal for packaging’ under Class 09-07. The representation … for entry of the name of the appellant in the Register of Designs. Section 30 read with Rule 33 and 35 of the Design Rules, 2001 says the mandatory procedures for entry of assignment and transmission in

Crocs Inc. Usa vs.aqualite India Limited and Anr

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property

571/2017 Page 6 of 45 10. It was further enquired from the counsel for the plaintiff, that the Designs Act 2000, as per its preamble being an Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to protection of designs, … prior to codification, of shape/design as a trade mark.14. The counsel for the plaintiff next drew attention to Section 27(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 but which merely provides that nothing contained therein shall affect rights … Reference was also made to Publication International Ltd. Vs. Landoll 164 F.3d 337 [7th Cir. 1998]. but which is found to be of no relevance