Advanced Search Results

indchemic Health Specialities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Naxpar Labs Pvt. Ltd. and ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Mark and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2, 28, 31 and 111

Reported in : 2002(4)BomCR431; 2002(3)MhLJ744

Advocate for Appellant : Virendra Tulzapurkar and ;Virag Tulzapurkar, Advs. i/b., V.S. Hegde and ;M.A. Mahadgut, Advs.

P.V. Kakade, J. 1. This notice of motion is moved by theplaintiff in the suit filed against the defendantsinter-alia seeking permanent injunction restrainingthe defendants from using to any medicinal orpharmaceutical preparations the impugned markCHERISH and/or any...

M/S. Kemp and Company and Another Vs. M/S. Prima Plastics Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Designs Act, 1971 - Sections 43, 45, 46(3), 47, 49, and 53; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 - Order 40; Design Act, 1911 - Sections 2(5) and 51-A; Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 479

Reported in : 1999(1)ALLMR64; 1999(1)BomCR239

Advocate for Appellant : Virag Tulzapurkar, ;Rahul Chitnis and ;H.J. Engineer, Advs. i/by ;Gordhandas & ;Fozdar

ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a matter of 'chair', not for power, but for infringement of registered design and passing off. In the action initiated by the plaintiffs relief is sought against the act of infringement...

Crest Communications Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India and Another

Court : Mumbai

Subject : ContractCommercial

Acts : Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 126; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2

Reported in : 2000(1)ALLMR598; 2000(2)BomCR466; (2000)2BOMLR193; 2000(3)MhLj163

Advocate for Appellant : Virag Tulzapurkar and ;Z. Bharucha. Advs. i/by ;Lex Inde

ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the plaintiff and the learned Counsel for defendants.2. The suit filed by the plaintiff is for declaration that the services rendered and films provided by the plaintiff to...

Procter and Gamble India Ltd. and Another Vs. Endolabs Limited and Oth ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 106; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 - Order 11, Rule 1 - Order 39, Rule 7

Reported in : 2000(3)BomCR136; (2000)1BOMLR938

Advocate for Appellant : Virag Tulzapurkar with ;R. M. Kadam and ;Menon i/b ;M. & ;M. Legal Venture

ORDERR. M. Lodha, J.1. This action is at the instance of Procter & Gamble (India) Ltd. and Richardson-Vicks Inc. (1st & 2nd plaintiffs respectively) against Endolabs Limited (1st defendants) and Shree Mangesh Medical Stores (2nd defendants)...

Tata Power Co. Limited and anr. Vs. Collector Bombay City and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : CivilProperty

Acts : Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - Sections 2(40); Maharashtra Increased Land Revenue and Special Assessment Act, 1974 - Sections 3

Reported in : 2001(4)ALLMR606; 2002(2)BomCR349

Advocate for Appellant : Virag Tulzapurkar, Adv., i/b., Desai Doijode and Patherphekar, Advs.;S. Aney, Adv. and ;Pradeep Jadhav, A.G.P.

S.A. Bobde, J.1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.Heard with consent of both the parties.2. By this petition, the petitioners challenge the demand notice dated 7th April, 2000 issued by the respondent No. 1 Collector, demanding due...

In Re: Pharmaceutical Products of India Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : CompanySICA

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 77, 81(1A), 100 to 104, 235, 251, 390, 391, 391(2), 433 and 529A; Drugs Act; Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 - Sections 15, 16 to 19, 19(4), 22, 22(1), 25, 32, 32(1), 77(4), 77A and 77A(2); Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 128; Drugs Rules

Reported in : [2006]131CompCas747(Bom); (2006)5CompLJ282(Bom); [2006]70SCL93(Bom)

Advocate for Appellant : Virag Tulzapurkar, Adv., i/b., Rajesh Shah and Co.;Sham Mehta, ;Darshan R. Mehta, ;Rishab Shah and ;Salil K. Shah, Advs., i/b., Dhruv Liladas and Co.;Shrikant Chavan, Adv., i/b., by Vandana Jaisingh,

A.M. Khanwailkar, J.1. This common judgment disposes of both the abovementioned company petitions. By these petitions filed under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956, the petitioner-company prays that the arrangement embodied in the scheme of...

Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. and ors. Vs. Vinayak J. Gaekwad and ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Civil

Acts : Companies Act, 1956; Rule of Racing - Rules 67 and 202; Defence of India Rules; Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 14, 34, 38 and 38(2)

Reported in : 2006(5)BomCR481; 2006(6)MhLj665

Advocate for Appellant : I.M. Chagla, Sr. Adv., ;Z.P. Bharucha, ;R.N. Sethna, ;K. Kalyaniwala, ;Sanidha Vedpathak, Advs., i/b., Maneksha Sethna, Janak Dwarkadas, Sr. Adv., ;Mohan Bir Singh, ;Virag Tulzapurkar, Sr. Adv., ;A.S.

H.L. Gokhale, J.1. First of the above two appeals i.e. Appeal (Lodging) No. 643 of 2006 is filed by a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 which, inter alia, conducts, supervises and oversees all horse...

Jimmy Abraham Thomas and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 3; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 115; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 226 and 266; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 1, Rule 8; Dentists Act, 1948 - Sections 10A and 10B(3); Indian Medical Councils Act, 1956 - Sections 10A, 10A(1), 10A(2), 10A(7), 10B, 10B(1), 10C, 20 and 33; Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 - Sections 3; Medical Council (Amendment) Act, 1993

Reported in : 2002(1)ALLMR1; 2002(3)BomCR219

Advocate for Appellant : V.C. Kotwal, Senior Advocate, ;Gulam E. Vahanvati, Advocate General, ;A.A. Kumbhakoni, Special Counsel, ;Armin Kalyanram, A.G.P., ; Sunip Sen, A. Wani and Mehul Shah, Advs. i/b., Little & Co.,

H. L. Gokhale, J.1. All the writ petitions in Group (A) above invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India raise common questions with respect to the correctness and legality of the Maharashtra Health Sciences Common...

Kesha Appliances P. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Royal Holdings Services Ltd. and ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 6, 81(1), 81(1A), 111A, 111A(2) and 111A(3); Securities Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 - Sections 11, 11(4), 11B, 11H, 12, 15A, 15B, 15C, 15D, 15E, 15F, 15H, 15HA, 15HB, 15I, 15Z, 15Y, 20A, 21, 24 and 32; Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969; Evidence Act, 1872; Inams Act - Sections 2A, 3(4), 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 9, 10AS, 12, 13 and 14; Estate Abolition Act; Limitation Act; Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 - Sections 331, 332, 334, 343, 344, 345A, 347(3), 347B, 347D and 347E; Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 1984 - Sections 7; Interstate Water Disputes Act, 1956; Securities Exchange Board of India Rules; Securities Exchange Board of India Regulations; Companies (Passing of the Resolutions by Postal Ballot) Rules, 2001;

Reported in : 2006(1)BomCR545; [2006]130CompCas227(Bom); [2005]65SCL293(Bom)

Advocate for Appellant : Navroze Seervai, Adv. a/w ;Percy Gandy, ;Ketan Parekh and ;Firdaus Puniwala, Advs., i/b., Crawford Bayley & Co.

S.U. Kamdar, J.1. These two Notices of Motion are taken out for various interim reliefs in a suit which has been preferred by the shareholders of a company known as Spice Jet Ltd The defendant No....

Modipon Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Subject : Land Acquisition

1. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 16-7-2001 made by the Chairman, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Respondent No. 1 (SEBI). In the said order, it s held that the Appellant, apart...