Advanced Search Results

Span Diagnostic Vs. Assistant Controller of Patents and Design and anr ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 83; Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 8, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 25(1), 25(2), 25(3), 25(4), 27, 28, 29(2), 29(3), 37, 41, 42, 47, 51, 54, 57, 59 to 63, 66, 69(3), 74, 78, 84(1) to 84(5), 85, 86, 88, 88(3), 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 97, 116, 116(1), 116(2), 117, 117A, 117A(2), 117G and 158; Patents Amendment Act, 2002 - Sections 1(2), 18 and 47; Patents Amendment Act, 2005 - Sections 1(1), 1(2), 23, 60 and 61; Patents Amendment Act, 1999

Reported in : LC2009(1)22; 2008(37)PTC56(Del)

question of law afore-noted has arisen due to the amendments incorporated in the Patents Act, 1970 by the Patents Amendment Act, 2002 notified on 25th June, 2002 but various provisions thereof brought into force firstly on 20.5.2003 and the remaining … into force. 10. Relevant for my decision would be to note that vide Section 18 of the Patent Amendment Act 2002, Section 25 of the Principal Act was amended by introducing clauses 'j' and 'k' after existing clause 'i' as … (ii) (a), and clause (b), of Section 37, Sections 41, 42, 47, 59 to 63 (both inclusive and Section 74 shall come into force on

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)

filed on 9th November 2000. According to Section 59(1) of Patents Act no amendment of application for … 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 … establish its case. In this context, 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 courts ' one of caution, ungrounded … the decision in Telemecanique and Controls (I) Limited v. Schneider Electric Industries 2002 (24) PTC 632 (Del) [hereafter referred to as Schneider], where it was … 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 … Plaintiff. It is alleged that on 8.1.2001, under Section 68 of the Act, 1970 the Plaintiffs had

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 … PCT (Patent Corporation Treaty), and withdrawn, as they were unacceptable to Indian authorities. It is submitted that of 59 original claims, only 26 survived and were granted. Monsanto‟s claim in the suit seeks enforcement of patent rights

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 … Amendment Act, 2002 with effect from 20.5.2003. The same is applicable to the present suit. BURDEN OF PROOF 59. Section 104-A provides for burden of proof in case of suits concerning infringement, which reads as under: “Section

Subuthi Finance Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2005)96TTJ(Chennai)473

clear that there had been no specific effect that the amendment effected to Section 158BB in the Finance Act, 2002, w.e.f. 1st July, 1995, would be applicable to the instant case as the block period covered ten years … Court. Now, we will go through the newly inserted Section 154(1A) of the Act by the Direct Taxes Amendment Act, 1964, w.e.f. 6th Oct., 1964, which takes care of the situation where any matter has been considered and … that there is no mistake apparent from record, which is obvious and patent, and he further reasoned that, "Suffice it to say that this is

Justice k.s.puttaswamy(retd) Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Right to Information

or decree of the Supreme Court.” 73. Relying on Section 6(2), which was introduced by way of the Amendment Act, 2002 (Act 14 of 2002) that came into force from 6-8-2002, it is submitted by Mr Rohatgi that the … that creation of a surveillance society, where every entity assists the State to snoop upon an Aadhaar holder. Section 59 of the impugned Act is unconstitutional inasmuch as it seeks to validate all action undertaken by the Central … of every citizen who is enrolled with the UIDAI. Section 57 is patently unconstitutional 15. Section 47 16. Section 48 - Power of Central Government

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. … did:"is effectively to limit assurance of exemption to the activities necessary to seek approval of a generic drug.‖ 59. In Japan, acts relating to the marketing approval of pharma products were deemed by the Supreme Court covered

Ramesh Chandra Das Vs. Kishore Chandra Das and ors.

Court : Orissa

Subject : Civil

Reported in : AIR2007Ori146

and decree of such single Judge.Section 100A was first introduced by amendment by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976. Section 97 of that Amending Act contained the provisions for Repeal and Savings. Section 97(2)(n) of the … of Section 100A in the Civil Procedure Code by its amendment in 2002.2. The material facts of the case are that both the appeals were … 100 itself would not apply to the respondents and they would be entitled to claim overtime wages under Section 59 of that Act read with Section 70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948.21. In Chandavarkar Sita … No further appeal in certain cases --Notwithstanding anything contained in 'any Letters Patent for any High Court or in any other instrument having the force

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 … 15 of the Letters Patent is not restricted by Sections 588 and 591 of the Code of Civil Procedure.58. In Jehangir Maneckji Cursetji (supra), the