Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents act 1970 39 of 1970 section 120 unauthorised claim of patent rights Page 1 of about 1,092 results (0.190 seconds)

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. 1.M.Seeniammal

Court : Chennai

..... respondent in w.a.no.1369 prayer writ appeals filed under section 15 of letters patents act against the order of this court dated 18.06.2013 ..... is a scheme providing that persons who had put in a specified number of years and continuing in employment as on the cut off date), it is not possible to others who were appointed subsequent to the cut-off date, to claim or contend that the scheme should be applied to them by extending the cut-off date or seek a direction for framing of fresh schemes providing for successive cut-off dates. ..... it cannot also be relied on to claim a right to be absorbed in service even though they have never been selected in terms of the relevant ..... high courts in exercising power under article 226 of the constitution will not issue directions for regularisation, absorption or permanent continuance, unless the employees claiming regularisation had been appointed in pursuance of a regular recruitment in accordance with relevant rules in an open competitive process, against sanctioned vacant posts. ..... ors air2006sc1806 this court held as under: ".there is no fundamental right in those who have been employed on daily wages or temporarily or on contractual basis, to claim that they have a right to be absorbed in service. ..... the right to claim a particular salary against the state must arise under a contract or under ..... the right to be treated equally with the other employees employed on daily wages, cannot be extended to a claim for equal treatment with those who were .....

Rajeev Indravadan Modi and ors. Vs. Instance Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. an ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2001)3GLR2010

..... according to the plaintiffs, it was a counter-claim for revocation, and therefore, by virtue of proviso to section 104 of the patents act read with section 64 of the said act, the suit was required to be transferred to the high ..... an unequivocal intention to proceed with the suit and acquiesce in the method of resolution of dispute adopted by the other party, namely, filing of the suit, and thereby, indicate that it has abandoned its right under the arbitration agreement to get the dispute resolved by arbitration, any other step would not disentitle the party from seeking relief under ..... suit may, in addition to his right of pleading a set-off under rule 6, set up by way of counter-claim against the claim of the plaintiff, a right or claim in respect of a cause of action accruing to the defendant against the plaintiff either before or after the filing of the suit but before the defendant has delivered his defence or before the time limited for delivering his defence has expired, whether such counter-claim is in the nature of a claim for damages or not. ..... right to file a further affidavit and/or written statement in the suit and counter-claim against the plaintiffs for revocation of the patent granted to the plaintiffs appears ..... the affidavit-in-rejoinder, it is stated as under :- '...i further submit that the plaintiffs reserve their right to file further comments as and when the defendants shall file written statement or counter-statement for the revocation of the plaintiffs' patent.... .....

India Nippon Electricals Limited Vs. Bajaj Auto Limited and Another

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... the party aggrieved in the opposition proceedings has the right of appeal under section 116(2) of the patents act, 1970 to the high court. ..... is an opposition procedure prior to the grant of patent, these opposition proceedings are not to be treated as coming under the category of pre-grant opposition by way of third party intervention opposition as provided under section 25(1) of the act, as amended by the patents (amendments) act, 2005, to be finally regarded as non appealable proceeding for the party who is aggrieved, when the hearing in respect ofopposition proceedings have been conducted and finalised after the patents act, 1970 as amended by the patents (amendments) act, 2005 came into force. ..... hence, the counsel further submitted that the impugned order ought not to be confused, as if, it is an order passed under section 25(1) of the patents act, 1970 (as amended by the amending act of 2005) consequent to an opposition by a third party intervention opponent. ..... " from the mahaan dairies precedent, the court cited a paragraph that read: "it is settled law that in order to claim benefit of a notification a party must strictly comply with the terms of the notification. ..... mohar singh (1955) 1 scr 893 held that the claim of the respondent mohar singh, as an evacuee under the east punjab refugees (registration of land claims) act, 1948 to be false and also an offence under the act. .....

Ucb Farchim Sa Vs. Cipla Ltd. and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : LC2010(1)278

..... ) either allowing or rejecting a pre-grant opposition filed under section 25(1) of the patents act, 1970 (patents act.).2. ..... if they are still aggrieved by that decision under section 25(4) of the patents act, they can file an appeal before the ipab in terms of section 117a of the patents act.where the pre-grant opposition is by a third party19. ..... (ii) it is not possible to agree with the view of ipab that since the right to file an appeal had accrued on the very date that apl had filed its pre-grant opposition, and on which date section 117 a of the patents act had not come into effect, the appeal would be maintainable in the high court, and by virtue of section 117 g, before the ipab. ..... therefore, to the extent that the pre-grant opposition has been rejected and the process claims of eli lilly have been entertained, it is in the same position as an interested party whose pre-grant opposition has been refused. ..... on 22nd march 2007 the assistant controller of patents and designs, new delhi gave a decision on the pre-grant opposition allowing the process claims 11 to 25 and 28 and declined the product claims. ..... was directed to comply with the directions in the impugned order dated 22nd march 2007 deleting the products and retaining the process claims by 20th june 2008. ..... aggrieved by the decision dated 23rd february 2007 by the assistant controller allowing the process claims of eli lilly & co. ..... filed a review petition as regards the rejection of its product claim. .....

Glaxo Smith Kline Plc and ors. Vs. Controller of Patents and Designs a ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2006(3)CHN577

..... writ petitioners are aggrieved by the decision of the assistant controller of patents and designs dated december 28, 2004 rejecting their application for exclusive marketing right under provisions of the patents act, 1970, section 24a.2. ..... examiner submitted his report dated july 28, 2000 that substances of claims 9,12 and 13 were not inventions within the meaning of section 3 of the patents act, 1970. ..... fresh decision in compliance with these directions shall be given within a fortnight from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by the controller, if he finds that right as claimed by the petitioners is to be given, then he shall make appropriate order conferring such right effective from may 03, 2002 when the application concerned attained finality, though in an order of rejection.29. ..... out the facts that on unsustainable grounds the controller rejected the application of the petitioners twice, and that in the face of the examiner's report there was no scope to reject the application regarding the claims ultimately pressed by the petitioners, he argues that this is a fit case where the writ court should issue a mandamus directing the authority to grant the benefit.24. ..... of that application, on august 30, 2000 they submitted an application for grant of exclusive marketing right of the substances for which they had claimed patent.3. ..... 25, 1998 they submitted an application for patent of invention for the substances indicated in the fifteen claims mentioned in their application. .....

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

Court : Delhi

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

..... 15. if the patent act, 1970 as amended from time to time and as in force as of 20.5.2003 had to be considered pertaining to a challenge to a patent the legal position would that under section 25 only one right to oppose a patent at the pre-grant stage was available and appeal against an order passed by the controller of patents was available before the high court under section 116 of the patents act for the reason by not bringing into force section 47 of the amendment act, 2002, chapter xix ..... does not constitute an anticipation of the invention by virtue of sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) of section 29; (c) that the invention so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification is claimed in a claim of a complete specification published on or after the priority date of the applicant's claim and filed in pursuance of an application for a patent in india, being a claim of which the priority date is earlier than that of the applicant's claim; (d) that the invention so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification was publicly known or publicly ..... :s.o. 514(e)-in exercise of the powers conferred by section 117g of the patents act, 1970 (39 of 1970), the central government hereby appoints the 2nd day of april, 2007 as the date on which all cases of appeals against any order or decision of the controller and all cases pertaining to revocation of patent other than on a counter-claim in a suit for infringement and rectification of register pending before any high court .....

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

Court : Delhi

..... . monsanto claimed to be the lawful owner and the patentee of the said patent and claims entitlement to rights granted under section 48 of the patents act, 1970.nuziveedu, on the other hand, refutes that the suit claim, for enforcement of patents is liable to be rejected as the subject patent is solely concerning an unpatentable matter (by reason of section 3 (j)) ..... . thus, it was averred by monsanto that the impugned patent does not fall within the exception covered under section 3(j) of the patents act, 1970.it was also argued that once the sub-licenses were terminated on account of material breach of the agreement in the form of non-payment of contractual dues , the dispute is not arbitrable, because the right to use the patent or the trademarks under the sub-license agreements did not subsist in terms of the safeguards particularly in the ..... plea in the case that the termination of the 2015 sub-license agreements was illegal and arbitrary, and having demonstrated this contention to be prima facie correct, the unilateral termination of the contract by the plaintiffs being unauthorised, the defendants cannot wish away the natural corollary of the sub-license agreements coming back to life ..... . cotton seed plus 120 grams refugia) was fixed for both bgi version and bg ii version .....

The Kohinoor Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Vijay Bharat Thread Mills (India)

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1958)60BOMLR397

..... the petitioner has filed this petition under the provisions of section 51a of the patents and designs act, 1911, for an order that the registration of the respondents 'sanyasi' design bearing ..... it has been observed as under:.when a question is stated to be referred to an established court without more, it, in my opinion, imports that the ordinary incidents of the procedure of that court are to attach, and also that any general right of appeal from its decisions likewise attaches.this passage clearly indicates that the ordinary incidents of the procedure of that court are to apply. ..... that section provides as under:revocation of a patent in whole or in part may be obtained on petition to or on a counter claim in a suit for infringement before a high court on all or any of the following grounds, namely..there the words used are 'a high court' and not 'the high ..... on registration a person who is interested acquires a right to have the same set aside provided the conditions laid down in section 51a of the act are satisfied. ..... its jurisdiction is enlarged, but all the incidents of such jurisdiction, including the right of appeal from its decision, remain the same.this passage also does not help ..... section 43 lays down that the controller may, on the application of any person claiming to be the proprietor of any new or original design not previously published in india, register the design under part ii of the act ..... design itself indicates that trade mark rights are claimed in respect of the design. .....

J. Mitra and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Controller of Patents and Desig. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2009(1)AWC366(SC); LC2008(3)31; 2008(38)PTC6(SC); 2008(11)SCALE524; (2008)10SCC368

..... even as on 20.5.2003 vide section 25 only one right to oppose a patent at the pre-grant stage was available and appeal against an order, passed by the earlier, lay before the high court under the then existing section 116 of the patents act, 1970 for the reason that the amended sections 116 and 117a were not ..... publication does not constitute an anticipation of the invention by virtue of sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) of section 29;(c) that the invention so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification is claimed in a claim of a complete specification published on or after the priority date of the applicant's claim and filed in pursuance of an application for a patent in india, being a claim of which the priority date is earlier than that of the applicant's claim;(d) that the invention so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification was publicly known or publicly used in ..... does not constitute an anticipation of the invention by virtue of sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) of section 29;(c) that the invention so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification is claimed in a claim of a complete specification published on or after the priority date of the claim of the patentee and filed in pursuance of an application for a patent in india, being a claim of which the priority date is earlier than that of the claim of the patentee;(d) that the invention so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification was publicly known or publicly used .....

Mariappan Vs. A.R. Safiullah,

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 2008(5)CTC97; LC2008(3)431; (2008)6MLJ1117; 2008(38)PTC341(Mad)

..... it is further submitted that in view of section 48(b) of the patents act,1970 if it is a process patent, the patent holder is having right to prevent third parties who do not have his consent and using that process and from offering for sale, importing for those process, the product obtained by that process in ..... respondent/4th defendant has submitted that the applicant/plaintiff of course can claim right under designs act for the banana shaped laminated paper and since there is no novelty or invention involved in manufacturing the artificial banana leaf, patent ought not to have been granted by the concerned authority. ..... and that no prima facie case has been made out in his favour;(b) the patent which is subject matter of the present dispute is not a novel or patentable invention;(c) the applicant/plaintiff has merely copied prior art;(d) the suit filed is only confined to the patents act and all relief including the relief of passing off is only claimed vis-`-vis, the registered patent;(e) the design of banana leaf registered in favour of the applicant/plaintiff is ..... that even the design of the banana leaf cannot be termed as original or the intellectual property of the applicant/plaintiff as it is a product of nature and no person including the applicant/plaintiff can hold proprietary right over such shape or even claim that he designed a banana leaf and that plastic, steel and even ceramic plates have been made in the shape and design of banana leaf for the past several years. .....