Advanced Search Results

Shri Sanjay Z. Rane, Vs. Smt. Saibai S. Dubaxi (Since Deceased Through ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : PropertyCivil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) Act, 2002 - Sections 4 and 100A; Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4, 6, 9(2), 18, 25 and 53; Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988; Goa, Daman and Diu (Administration) Act, 1962 - Sections 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8; Goa, Daman and Diu Judicial Commissioner's Court (Declaration as High Court) Act 1964 - Sections 3, 8 and 11; Maharashtra High Court (Hearing of Writ Petitions, by Division Bench and Abolition of Letters Patent Appeals) Act, 1986; Goa, Daman and Diu Reorganisation Act, 1987 - Sections 20, 20(1), 20(3), 20(4), 22, 25 and 30; Small Causes Act; Bombay (Extension of Jurisdiction to Goa, Daman and Diu) Act, 1981 - Sections 3, 4, 7(2), 7(3), 9 and 13; States Reorganisation Act, 1956 - Sections 52, 54, 57 and 69; Goa Land Revenue Code

Reported in : 2009(111)BomLR2668

It appears that on 18.9.2002, this Court took a view that Section 4 of Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002, especially in relation to Section 100A thereof was applicable retrospectively and, therefore, letters patent appeals already filed were … Maliackal, Saheeda, and Anr. reported at : [2002]3SCR1098 wherein the Honble Apex Court has considered the provisions of Section 52 of States Reorganisation Act, 1956 and it is contended that said provision is pari materia with Section 4 … B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Letters Patent Appeal was disposed of on 18.9.2002 by this Court and said Judgment

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 … of protection to the intellectual labour of Monsanto. FAO (OS) (COMM) 86/2017 & 76/2017 Page 25 of 60 52. Learned senior counsel also argued that Nuziveedu‟s claims, based on researchers‟ rights under Section 30 of the Plant

Natural Remedies Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore, Rep. by Its Chairman and Managi ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code Of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 7 Rule 1; Companies Act, 1956

Reported in : 2012(4)CTC(IP)8; 2012(3)KCCR140(SN)

from 20th April 1998 which was initially valid upto 20th April 2005. However, with the enactment of the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 and the framing of the Patent Rules, 2003, the plaintiffs patent bearing No.186857 has been subsequently extended for … Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The failure to produce the assignment document as per Section 68 of the Act is fatal to the plaint and consequently, the plaint ought to be rejected under

Natural Remedies Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore, Rep. by Its Chairman and Managi ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : MRTP

Patents and Designs Act, 1911, Section 2;Patents Act, 1970, Sections 2(10), 5, 10, 13(4), 64, 104, 107, 108; Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002, Section 104-A ;Patent Rules, 2003- Original Suit and Counterclaim-Revocation of Patent- Process patent for ayurvedic poultry feed registered by … of, or in connection with, any such examination or investigation or any report or other proceedings consequent thereon.” 52. Therefore, it is clear that there is no presumption in favour of the validity of the patent merely

Spic Southern Petrochemicals Industries Corporation Ltd. Vs. M/S A.K. ...

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Subject : Land Acquisition

the hones drawers. 11. Proviso to Section 142 is added under amendment brought in to the Negotiable Instrument (Amendment) Act,2002. Section 142 after amendment reads as follows:  “142. Cognizance of offences. - Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code … that is to say, if the words are semantically ambiguous, or if a provision, if read literally, is patently incompatible with other provisions of that Instrument, the Court would be justified in construing the words in a … Act, convicted the accused. 5(e). The used has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 52/2008 on the file of the Fast Track Court -I. The Learned District

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.

Fazal Ali Vs. Amna Khatun and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Motor Vehicles

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 100A; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) 2002; Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

Reported in : II(2004)ACC655; 2005ACJ29; AIR2004Raj39; 2005(1)KLT828; RLW2004(3)Raj1454; 2004(1)WLC339

Motor Vehicles Act is not maintainable in view of Section 100A introduced by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 with effect from 1-7-2002?2. The impact of Section 100A with respect, to special appeals preferred under Section 18 … 2002, appeals filed after 1-7-2002 are not maintainable and only such letters patent appeals saved are those filed prior to 1-7-2002 whether they have been … Judge of this Court as was vested under Article 225 of the Constitution and later on conferred under Section 52 of the State Reorganization Act, 1956 and the Rajsthan High Court Rules therefore, was not affected or abrogated

Bayer Corporation vs.union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

ensuring the availability of the same in other countries. He relies on the Notes on Clauses of the Patents (Amendment) Act 2002 as well as the Joint Parliamentary Committee Report pertaining to the insertion of Section 107A of the Act. … philosophical experiments, or for the purpose of ascertaining the sufficiency of the machine to produce its described effects." 52. The next phase in the development of this branch was in Roche where the patentee plaintiff Roche Products,

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 … the defendant in C.S. 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 … is the plaintiff, namely, Bajaj Auto Limited, has filed Civil Appeal No. 523 of 2008 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the above said order

P.S. Sathappan (Dead) by Lrs. Vs. Andhra Bank Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 2(9), 3, 4, 4(1), 35A, 96 to 103, 104, 104(1), 104(2), 105, 105(2), 115, 117, 135, 217(1), 218D, 278 and 282 - Order 7, Rules 10 and 11 - Order 10, Rule 3 - Order 16, Rule 2 - Order 18, Rules 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 16 - Order 20, Rules 1 and 8 - Order 21, Rules 72, 90 and 92 - Order 33, Rule 7 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 - Order 41, Rule 35 - Order 43, Rule 1 - Order 49, Rules 1, 2 and 3; Constitution of India - Articles 133, 136, 225, 329 and 372; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) Act, 1976; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) Act, 2002; ;Indian High Courts Act, 1861; Legislative Act; Government of India Act, 1935 - Sections 223; India (Adaptation of Existing Laws) Order, 1949; Independence Act, 1947 - Section

Reported in : AIR2004SC5152; 2004(5)CTC209; JT2004(8)SC464; (2005)1MLJ105(SC); RLW2005(1)SC19; 2004(8)SCALE601; (2004)11SCC672

in the Code by reason of Code of Civil Procedure amendment Act, 1976 or Code of Civil Procedure Amendment Act, 2002. In any event the provision of Section 100A of the Code being not retrospective in operation, the right … all such laws. In Clause 35 of the Letters Patent, there was a clear provision that the Letters Patents are subject to the legislative powers of the Governor-General in Council. It was accordingly thought that the Code