Advanced Search Results

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)

at this stage of interim application, while considering the prima facie case and the balance of convenience, the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 (Act 38 of 2002), which has come into effect from 20.05.2003 and Amendment Act 2005, which came into … present to have a valid patent.32. Therefore, it is clear that even after the grant of patent under Section 43 of the Patents Act, 1970, which is given effect from the date of filing of application for the

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

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Indian Patent Act, 1970 - Sections 2, 2(1) 3, 5, 5(2), 8, 10, 11A, 11A(3), 11A(7), 11B, 12, 13, 13(4), 14 to 21, 25(1), 25(2), 25(3), 25(4), 43, 45(1), 47, 48, 53, 59(1), 64, 64(1), 68, 104A, 107, 108 and 117A; Indian Companies Act, 1956; Trade and Cosmetics Act; Patent (Amendment) Act, 2005; Patent (Amendment) Act, 2002

Reported in : 148(2008)DLT598; LC2008(2)35; 2008(37)PTC71(Del)

patent in respect of Erlotinib and its process by application No. 537/Del/1996 on 13.3.1996. The Controller General of Patents, Trademarks and Designs, New Delhi granted a certificate bearing Patent No. 196774 dated 23.02.2007, which was recorded in … learned Counsel also argued that the nature of changes brought in by amendment in 2005, affording multiple challenges shows that the previous rule, evolved by … and Controls (I) Limited v. Schneider Electric Industries 2002 (24) PTC 632 (Del) [hereafter referred to as … Sections 11A, 12 and 14, then at the stage of pre-grant opposition under Section 25(1) and finally, under Section 43 when the patent is granted subject to satisfaction of the two pre-conditions. Given that in the present case … process of its manufacture is patented according to provisions of the Patent Act, 1970 (hereafter 'the Act'). The Central Drug Standard Control Organisation, Directorate General

Mahammed Saud and ors. Vs. Dr. (Maj) Shaikh Mahfooz and anr.

Court : Orissa

Subject : Civil

Reported in : AIR2009Ori46; 2008(II)OLR725:AIR2009Orissa46

Order, 1948, this Letters Patent Appeal can be entertained in view of amendment of the CPC by the Amendment Act 22 of 2002 after 1st July, 2002.13. Before proceeding further, it would be prudent to quote the relevant … the Letters Patent Appeal was not maintainable in view of amendment of Section 100-A CPC against the judgment/order of a learned Single Judge. Similar view … Single Judge in an appeal filed under Section 104 read with Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC was considered by a Division Bench. The disputes arose … a learned Single Judge of this Court in FAO No. 386 of 2007 is assailed in this Letters Patent Appeal. In the FAO an order of September 9, 2005 passed by the Ad hoc Addl. District Judge,

Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. And Ors. Vs.monsanto Technology Llc and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Trade (GATT), including the Trade- Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement, India, inter alia, introduced the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002, in June 25, 2002. This amendment altered the definition of “an invention” under Section 2(1)(j) to include the … to 38: A progeny plant wherein said plant has inherited said nucleic acid sequence.  Claims 41 to 43: A method of producing a transgenic progeny plant comprising of obtaining the first plant, obtaining a second plant

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 the appellant in O.S.A. No. 283 of 2006 the said decision requires reconsideration in view of the Patents (amendment) Act 2005 under which, major amendments were effected to the Patents Act, 1970. The learned Counsel further invited the … granting order of interim injunction.61. Section 48 of the Patents Act, 1970 as amended by the Patents (amended Act 2002) with effect from 20th May, 2003) protects the rights of patentees. Since we earlier held that the patent … and post grant oppositions had been raised in respect of the patent granted to the applicant/plaintiff and under Section 43 of the Patents Act 1970, it is open to a party who is opposing the patent to prove

Shri Chandreshwar Bhuthanath Devastan of Paroda by Its Special Attorne ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Civil

Reported in : (2003)105BOMLR915

100A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which has been amended by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 will be prospective in operation or retrospective in operation. The aforesaid Amendment was brought into force on 1st … on 1st July, 2002.2. The only issue which has been argued is whether any of the pending Letters Patent Appeals which have already been admitted by this Court are also covered by the said Section 100A as

iridium India Telecom Ltd. Vs. Motorola Inc.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Civil Constitution

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) 1908 - Sections 2(18), 4(1), 15(1), 15A, 57, 100, 100A, 116 to 120, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129 and 148 - Order 8, Rule 1; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) , 1976 - Sections 97 and 97(1); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1877 - Sections 16, 17, 54, 119, 160, 182 to 185, 187, 190, 191, 192, 198 to 206, 261, 409, 579, 632, 638 and 652; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1882 - Sections 638 and 652; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment)Act, 1895; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) , 2002 - Sections 16; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1859; Central Act; Constitution of India - Article 254; High Court Original Side Rules; Punjab Court Act, 1918 - Sections 41

Reported in : AIR2005SC514; 2005(2)ALD34(SC); 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)191; 2005(2)ALT32(SC); 2005(2)AWC1872(SC); 2005(3)BomCR781; (2005)107BOMLR967; (2005)2CALLT59(SC); 2005(1)CTC304; 118(2005)D; 2005 (2) SCC 145

so interpreted as not to defeat the substantive vested rights created in favour of a litigant under the Amendment Act of 2002. Since the written statement had not been filed within the time prescribed therein, by reason of … impugns the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in a Letters Patent appeal holding that the amended provision of Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 … a prayer was made that the court may exercise its powers under Section 148 of the CPC and grant further extension of 30 days beyond

Yahoo! Inc (Formerly ‘overture Services Inc.’), a Delaware C ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Intellectual Property

there existed an appeal against the pre-grant opposition under section 116 of the Act as amended by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 before the grant of patent. The counsel argued that there has to be a remedy when there is … the grant of patent only under section 15 of the Act which is evident from the language of section 43 of the Act which reads as follows: “43. Grant of patents. – (1) Where an application for a

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 28, 33, 37, 43, 43A, 43(1), 43(2), 145, 145(1) and 145(2); Companies Act - Sections 209(3); Income Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 10(2) and 10(5); Finance Act, 1967; Finance Act, 2002

Reported in : (2007)210CTR(Del)354; 142(2007)DLT650; [2007]294ITR451(Delhi)

is whether the Appellant is right in contending that amendment to Section 43-A brought about by the Finance Act, 2002 with effect from 1-4-2003 is merely clarificatory and, thereforee, retrospective. One reason for this contention is that the … assessed to be used in scientific research related to the class of business carried on by him or patent rights or copyrights acquired from abroad or any capital asset required by a company for the purpose of

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Vs. Amtek Geophysical Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 19, 20, 37, 37(3), 37(4) and 41; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 9, 11, 16, 21, 43 and 43(2); UNCITRAL Rules - Rule 6 and 6A - Schedule - Article 19; Railways Claims Tribunal Act - Sections 18; Limitation Act, 1908 - Schedule - Article 137; Limitation (Amendment) Act, 1963 - Sections 3, 3(2) and 5 - Schedule - Article 137; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Orders 32 and 33

Reported in : 115(2004)DLT624

[2003]3SCR1149 it has been opined thus:-26. A perusal of the above said provisions shows that it is the Amendment Act of 1976 which has conferred a statutory right on a defendant to file a counter-claim. The relevant words … and consequently Dr. Avtar Singh was appointed in his place in December, 2002. It has been stated in the Petition that between December, 2002 and … of Section 37 of the old Act a little later. It is clear that on a reading of Section 43 the same position obtains under the 1996 Act. However, there is no gainsaying that the counter-claim cannot be … embroiled in esoteric legal arguments that we fail to perceive what is patently obvious. If A has a claim or grievance against B plain commonsense