Advanced Search Results

Mariappan Vs. A.R. Safiullah,

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 23 and 53; Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2, 12, 13(4), 43, 45(1), 48, 53, 104 and 108; Patents and Designs Act, 1911 - Sections 11 and 26(1); Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005; Copyright Act, 1967; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 151 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2

Reported in : 2008(5)CTC97; LC2008(3)431; (2008)6MLJ1117; 2008(38)PTC341(Mad)

for ad-interim injunction restraining him from passing off is not maintainable in terms of the provisions of the Patents Act, 1970. 6. In respect of the applications filed by the 4th respondent/4th defendant, the applicant/plaintiff has filed his reply. … The learned senior counsel for the 4th respondent/4th defendant has also drawn the attention of this Court to Section 13(4) of the Patents Act, 1970. The said provision says that the examination and investigations required under Section … J.1. The orders passed herein will govern the disposal of O.S.A. Nos. 263 and 283 of 2006.For the sake of convenience, the array of parties

Chemtura Corporation Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property RightsCivil

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 3, 8, 8(1), 8(2), 11A(7), 12, 13(4), 25, 47 and 48, 48(1), 48(2), 53, 64, 64(1), 68, 69, 107 and 156; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 80 - Order 39, Rules 1, 2 and 4; Patents Rules, 2003 - Rules 12(1), 12(3), 15 and 25

Reported in : 2009(41)PTC260(Del)

Organisation (RDSO.). 10. According to the Plaintiff by virtue of Section 48 read with Section 53 of the Patents Act, 1970 (Act.) the Plaintiff's Patent Certificate No. 213608 dated 9th January 2008 is valid for a term of 20 … S. Muralidhar, J. IA No. 6782/2009(Under Section XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC) & IA No. 8372/2009 (Under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC) 1. IA No. 6782/2009 is an application

Bajaj Auto Ltd., State of Maharashtra Rep. by S. Ravikumar Vs. Tvs Mot ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2, 10, 11, 11(2), 11(3), 11B(1), 11B(3), 12, 12(1), 13, 13(1), 13(4), 25, 26(1), 43, 47, 48, 53(1), 64, 104A, 105, 106 and 108; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 - Sections 48; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005; Motor Vehicles Act; Patents Act, 1949; Patents and Designs Act, 1911 - Sections 12; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2; Designs Act, 1911 - Sections 2(8), 26(1), 51 and 53

Reported in : (2008)ILLJ726Mad; LC2008(1)217; 2008(36)PTC417(Mad)

No. 1111 of 2007.2. C.S. No. 1111 of 2007 is a suit filed under Section 108 of the Patents Act, 1970 for the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the plaintiff's patent No. 195904 and/or from using 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

Press Metal Corporation Limited Vs. Noshir Sorabji Pochkhanawalla and ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2(1), 15, 16, 18, 19, 25(1), 29, 57, 59 and 78

Reported in : AIR1983Bom144; ILR1983Bom805

amend a specification are to be found in Section 15, 18, 19, 57, 59 and 78 of the Patents Act, 1970. Section 15 empowers the Controller to requires the applicant's specification or drawing to be amended to this satisfaction before … grant of patent and directing the Complete Specification to be amended as indicated in the said order.2. On 28-3-1971 one Noshir Edulji Pochkhanawalla made an application numbered 130620 for registration of a Patent for an invention relating

Bilcare Limited Vs. Amartara Private Limited

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patent Act, 1970 - Sections 2(11), 3, 13(4), 25(2), 29(2), 32, 64 and 107(1); Designs Act; Patents Act, 1911 - Sections 2(8) and 26(1); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 39, Rules 1, 2, 2A and 4; Patent Law

Reported in : LC2007(2)42

improvement and an allied invention'. [Section 2(8) of 1911 Act.] It is to be noted that unlike the Patents Act, 1970, the Act of 1911 does not specify the requirement of being useful in the definition of 'invention'. But

F. Hoffmann-la Roche Ltd. and anr. Vs. Cipla Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2(1), 3, 5(2), 11A(7), 11B, 12, 13(4), 14, 25(1), 25(2), 28, 43, 47, 48, 64, 83, 84, 92, 92A and 107; Companies Act, 1956; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 - Sections 3; Trade Marks Act - Sections 31; Essential Commodities Act, 1953; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 7, Rule 11 - Order 39, Rule 1; Drug Price Control Order

Reported in : 159(2009)DLT243; LC2009(2)1; 2009(40)PTC125(Del)

Register of Patents on 6th July, 2007. It is submitted that in terms of the amendments to the Patents Act, 1970 ('Act') in 2005, the product Erlotinib as well as the process of its manufacture stand patented and are … the prior art EP '226. It was therefore held to be not an invention within the meaning of Section 2(1)(j) of the Patents Act, 1970 and no patentable invention within the meaning of Section 3(d) of the Patents

Standipack Private Limited and Another Vs. M/S. Oswal Trading Co. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2; Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 9

Reported in : 1999IVAD(Delhi)613; AIR2000Delhi23; 80(1999)DLT56

'patented article' and patented process as appearing in the provisions of sub-section 2(j) & 2 (o) of the Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter called the Act). Reliance was also sought to be placed on the provisions of Sections 9, 11

Indian Network for People Living with Hiv/Aids, Rep. by Its President ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975; Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2(C), 25, 25(1), 25(2), 64, 77 and 159; Patents Rules, 2003 - Rule 2, 55, 55(1) to (6), 55A; Land Acquisition Act - Sections 4(1) and 6(2); Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005; Bengal Money Lenders Act - Sections 35; Motor Vehicles Act - Sections 89; Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 - Sections 41(2); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 21, Rules 66 and 90; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 21 and 226

Reported in : 2009BusLR478; 2009(1)CTC32; LC2009(2)36

opposition at a pre-grant stage to the Patent Application of the 4th respondent under Section 25(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 (herein after referred to as the 'said Act). In the said application it was contended by the petitioners … is a drug used to treat CMC retinitis. The 4th respondent's Patent Application No. 959/MAS/1995 was filed on 27.07.1995, and the 2nd respondent published the said application on 25.02.2005 in Issue No. 06/2005 in the Official Journal

Surendra Lal Mahendra Vs. JaIn Glazers and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 2

Reported in : ILR1981Delhi257

of a patent is not guaranteed by the grant, is now expressly provided in Section 13(4) of the Patents Act, 1970. In the .light of this principle, Mr. Mehta's argument that there is a presumption in favor of the … J.D. Jain, J.(1) The facts germane to the disposal of this application underorder 39, Rule 1 and 2 read with s. 151 of Code of Civil Procedure for ad interim injunction concisely are that the plaintiff