Advanced Search Results

Novartis Ag Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Intellectual Property

Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.3. What is the true import of section 3(d) of the Patents Act, 1970?. How does it interplay with clauses (j) and (ja) of section 2(1)?. Does the product for which the

Novartis Ag and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 3(d)(b), 2(1)(d), 133, 24(A), 25(1), 2(8)(10), 14, 5, 10; Atomic Energy Act, 1962 - Section 20(1); Patents and Designs Act, 1911

Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.3. What is the true import of section 3(d) of the Patents Act, 1970?How does it interplay with clauses (j) and (ja) of section 2(1)? Does the product for which the appellant

Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ) Vs. Competition Commission of I ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

a 'patentee'). Ericsson contends that any issue regarding a claim for royalty would fall within the scope of Patents Act, 1970 (hereafter the 'Patents Act') and cannot be a subject matter of examination under the Competition Act. This, essentially, … where the patented invention is not worked in the territory of India. 157. Sub-section (7) of Section 84 lists out different instances where the requirements … to as the 'impugned order' or 'impugned orders') passed by the Competition Commission of India (hereafter 'CCI') under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereafter referred to as 'the Competition Act'). The impugned order dated 12th

Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ) Vs. Intex Technologies (India) ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of rights in eight patents registered in India alongwith damages/rendition of accounts and delivery up etc.2. Alongwith the plaint the plaintiff has filed … claimed that the plaintiff is one of the largest telecommunications companies in the world. The Ericsson group is active in more than 180 countries having annual sales of USD35Billion (approximately) for the year 2013. The Ericsson’s main … being I.A. No.6735/2014 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC. By this order, I propose to decide the abovementioned application.3.

Astrazeneca Ab & Ors vs.p Kumar & Anr

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

2005. It was not subjected to any pre-grant or post-grant opposition under sections 25(1) and 25(2) of the Patents Act, 1970. However, in 2015 Micro Labs Limited i.e. defendant No.2 in CS(COMM) 749/2018 filed a petition for revocation of … published way back in the year 2005. It was not subjected to any pre-grant or post-grant opposition under sections 25(1) and 25(2) of the Patents Act, 1970. However, in 2015 Micro Labs Limited i.e. defendant No.2 in … experts in chemical and medicinal filed. In Martin F.D’Souza v. Mohd. Ishfaq, 157(2009) DLT391(SC) = 12(2009) CPJ32(SC) = II(2009) SLT20= (2009) 3 SCC1 Supreme Court

Bristol Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland & Anr vs.sanjay Jain & A ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

IN20393 and they may violate the exclusive rights of the plaintiffs granted under Section 48 of the Indian Patents Act, 1970. Therefore, the present suit is the nature of a quia timet action against the defendants for the infringement

F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. and Others Vs. Cipla Ltd. and Another

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Sr.Advocate and Ms.Pratibha M.Singh, Sr.Advocate who appeared for Cipla laboured through the case law, the provisions of the Patents Act, 1970 as amended from time to time, the pleadings of the parties, the various documents exhibited at the trial … law. 13. Interestingly, in creating this India-specific inventive step test which is based on a joint reading of Section 64 and Section 2(ja) of the Patent Act, 1970. the learned Single Judge has identified certain essential ingredientsof … Vs. Union of India and Ors. it has been held as under:- 157. What is efficacy'? Efficacy means the ability to produce a desired or

Shushila Kesarbhai and ors. Vs. Bai Lilavati and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 4, 4(1), 98 and 98(3); Repealing and Amending Act, 1928; Constitution of India - Article 245

Reported in : AIR1975Guj39

by section 98. sub-section (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, or Clause 36 of the Letters Patent. The Full Bench of five Judges has taken the view in 21 Bom LR 157 = (AIR 1919 … jurisdiction or appellate jurisdiction-and here appellate jurisdiction includes revisional jurisdiction: Vide AIR 1970 SC I-Section 575 was on its plain terms restricted in its application … provisions which fall for consideration. The first Code of Civil Procedure enacted by the Governor-General in Council was Act 8 of 1859. Before this Code of 1859 was enacted, the procedure of the mofussil Courts was governed

M/S. Aachi Masala Foods (P) Ltd. Vs. S.D. Murali, Trading as the Achi ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Education

were transferred vide Section 100 (as amended) of the T. M. Act, 1999 and Section 117-G of the Patents Act, 1970 (1970 Act in short). The power to correct the error apparent on the face of the record etc., … Act provided for power to make Rule in two Sections, one was Section 92 and the other was Section 157. Section 157 deals with the matters relating to which the Central Government may make rules to carry out

Smadh Bawa Maru Dass Vs. the Financial Commissioner, Appeals and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : ConstitutionTenancy

Acts : Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 - Sections 18; Constitution of India - Articles 136 and 226

Reported in : (2004)137PLR348

measuring 46 kanals and 16 marlas comprised in khasra Nos. 155, 156, 157, 158, 162 and 163. On 13.6.1967, an application was filed on behalf … by the petitioner for quashing order dated 6.1.1970 was dismissed by the learned Single Judge and the Letters Patent Appeal filed against the order of the learned Single Judge was dismissed by the Division Bench.4. In the … litigation and is represented by his legal representatives, under Section 24 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (for short, 'the Act') and declared that he is entitled to purchase the land under his tenancy.2.