Coffee - Judgment Search Results

Coffee Vs. Groover

Court: US Supreme Court

Coffee v. Groover - 123 U.S. 1 (1887) U.S. Supreme Court Coffee v. Groover, 123 U.S. 1 (1887) Coffee

Coffee Vs. Planters Bank of Tennessee

Court: US Supreme Court

Coffee v. Planters Bank of Tennessee - 54 U.S. 183 (1851) U.S. Supreme Court Coffee v. Planters Bank of

Consolidated Coffee Limited and anr. Vs. Coffee Board and anr.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: JT1995(1)SC1; 1994(4)SCALE1025; (1995)1SCC312; [1994]Supp5SCR632; [1995]97STC95(SC)

N.P. Singh, J.1. The appellants are the growers of coffee. They filed Writ Petitions for injuncting the Coffee Board respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board')

Consolidated Coffee Ltd. and anr. Vs. Coffee Board, Bangalore

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1980SC1468; (1980)3SCC358; [1980]3SCR625; [1980]46STC164(SC)

V.D. Tulzapurkar, J. 1. These writ petitions filed by Registered Exporters of coffee under Article 32 of the Constitution raise an important question of proper construction of Section 5(3), a provision

Bharathiya Coffee Workers Catering Service (P) Ltd. Vs. Indian Coffee ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR1999Ker169

challenges a decree for prohibitory injunction restraining it from using or continuing to the use the name 'Indian Coffee House' to its catering establishments. The suit was filed by the respondent Co-operative Society. According to the Co-operative

The Mysore Coffee Curing Works Ltd., a Company Incorporated Under the ...

Court: Karnataka

1974 and 1975. Under these agreements, the appellant was appointed as the agent to receive, cure, store the coffee and thereafter deliver the same. The amounts received by the respondent were to be kept in the Pool

Consolidated Coffee Ltd. and ors. Vs. the Coffee Board and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1989KAR1532; 1988(2)KarLJ488; [1989]74STC272(Kar)

M. Rama Jois, J.1. In these petitions, presented by the coffee planters, the following question of law arises for consideration : 'Whether, the respondent - Coffee Board is authorised

Sekar Coffee Manufacturing Company Vs. Coffee Board and Another

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [1990]77STC318(Mad)

by way of contingency deposit from the petitioner and pass such other order ...' 2. The petitioner, a coffee manufacturing company, is doing business for more than 30 years. The petitioner-company takes part in the coffee pool

The Coffee Board, Bangalore Vs. Famous Coffee and Tea Works, Coimbator ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1965Mad14

Ramadchandra Iyer, C.J. (1) The India Coffee Board has filed these appeals against the decree of the Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, in a batch of suits

M. Lachia Setty and Sons Ltd. Vs. Coffee Board, Bangalore

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1981SC162; (1980)4SCC636; [1981]1SCR884

O.S. No. 316 1955) in damages against the two appellants (M. Lachia Setty & Sons Ltd. and Giri Coffee Works) respectively.2. The respondent (the Coffee Board, Bangalore) is a statutory body incorporated under the Coffee Act, 1942