Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents act 1970 39 of 1970 section 144 reports of examiners to be confidential Sorted by: old Year: 1995 Page 1 of about 1 results (0.040 seconds)

Common Cause and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 62(1996)DLT28

Mahinder Narain, J.(1) By this order I propose to dispose of the writ petition C.W. No. 2453 of 1995, which is filed as public interest litigation by (1) Common Cause (a registered Society under the Societies Registration Act) and (2) Forum for justice and Peace (a registered Society under the Societies Registration Act). (2) The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court in public interest in view of 'the serious situation created due to various acts of commission and omission of respondent No. 3 in relation to the respondent No. 2 Institute which is the most prestigious medical and research facility in the country.' The respondents in the petition are Union of India, respondent No. 1, Ail India institute of Medical Sciences, respondent No. 2, and B. Shankaranand, respondent No. 3. (3) The writ petition was amended by the petitioners, and the amended petition was taken on record by order dated 12.7.1995. In the amended petition the following reliefs were claimed by t...

Rakesh Kumar JaIn Vs. Devender Singh Mehta and anr.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 57(1995)DLT135; 1995(32)DRJ207

R.C. Lahoti, J. (1) The plaintiffs have filed this suit for specific performance of contract for sale of a property and in the alternative for recovery of damages. The suit is valued at Rs.4,90,000.00 and a court fee of Rs.7,126.40p has been paid. The suit was filed in the year 1980. Since then it has been vigorously prosecuted and contested. (2) The defendants No. 1 and 2 have been residing in U.K. It is their case in the written statement that they are British passport holders. On 16th July, 1991, the defendant's counsel delivered an information under Order 22 Rule 10 A Civil Procedure Code of Davinder Singh Mehta, the defendant No.1, having expired on 24th May, 1991. No certificate of death was filed. (3) On 29th July, 1991, the counsel for the plaintiff gathered information in the Court, at the time of hearing, that the defendant No.1, Davinder Singh Mehta had died in U.K. Counsel for defendant No.1 was directed by the Court to file the death certificate on or before 28.8.91. That ...

Aliparamba Mohammed and ors. Vs. Taluk Land Board and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT1998(9)SC499; (1997)11SCC256

ORDER1. Leave granted.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Kerala affirming the order of the Taluk Land Board dismissing the application of the appellants filed under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act as barred by time.4. The appellant had claimed that he was unaware of the proceedings taken against Respondent 4. Reliance has been placed on a purchase certificate issued in favour of the appellant by the Land Tribunal. In our opinion, in a case where the claim of a tenure-holder is founded on a purchase certificate issued by the Land Tribunal, then unless that certificate is not found to be genuine or authentic, it would be unjust and unfair to preclude such a person from filing an application under Section 85(8) on the ground of delay. Since the High Court and the Taluk Land Board had dismissed the application of the appellant only on the ground of delay, their orders cannot be maintained.5. I...

Qualitex Co. Vs. Jacobson Products Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co. - 514 U.S. 159 (1995) OCTOBER TERM, 1994 Syllabus QUALITEX CO. v. JACOBSON PRODUCTS CO., INC. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 93-1577. Argued January 9, 1995-Decided March 28,1995 Petitioner Qualitex Company has for years colored the dry cleaning press pads it manufactures with a special shade of green gold. Mter respondent Jacobson Products (a Qualitex rival) began to use a similar shade on its own press pads, Qualitex registered its color as a trademark and added a trademark infringement count to the suit it had previously filed challenging Jacobson's use of the green-gold color. Qualitex won in the District Court, but the Ninth Circuit set aside the judgment on the infringement claim because, in its view, the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act) does not permit registration of color alone as a trademark. Held: The Lanham Act permits the registration of a trademark that consists, purely and simp...

Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. W. Doraisamy

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1996)130CTR(Mad)157; [1995]215ITR853(Mad)

Mishra, J.1. The assessee claimed assessment under s. 7(4) of the WT Act, 1957, before its repeal and substitution by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989, w.e.f. 1st April, 1989. The CWT, however, exercised the power under s. 25(2) of the Act, called for and examined the records of the proceedings, found that the order passed by the Assessing Officer(AO) was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and after hearing the assessee and enquiry set aside the assessment order and remitted the matter to the WTO (the assessing authority) to redo the assessment in accordance with law. The assessee appealed to the Tribunal. The Tribunal has set aside the CWT's order and restored the assessment. The Revenue has since obtained a reference under s. 27(1) of the Act on the question whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it can be said that the house was exclusively used by the assessee for residential purposes throughout the period of 12 months immediatel...

Saibanna Vs. Assistant Commissioner and Land Acquisition Officer

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1995KAR1137; 1995(2)KarLJ54

ORDERM.F. Saldanha, J.1. This is a set of Appeals preferred by a group of agriculturists whose lands were acquired by the State for a public purpose, namely, an irrigation project. The Appeals are basically for purposes of obtaining enhanced compensation and proceed on the basis that this Court has enhanced the compensation in certain other similar cases. There is a considerable delay in the presentation of these Appeals. Mr. Shankar, learned Counsel who represents the appellants in all these cases has filed the necessary affidavits in support of the I.As. for condonation of delay in each case. Basically, each of the appellants contends that the agricultural lands which were the source of livelihood have been acquired by the State, as a result of which the appellants had to migrate elsewhere in search of jobs. Admittedly, from a reading of the affidavits that have been filed, what emerges is that the appellants are all small agriculturists, obviously coming from a rural background and,...

Nirakar Das Vs. Gourhari Das and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1995Ori270; 1995(I)OLR526

A. Pasayat, J.1. Nirakar Das, plaintiffNo. 1 having failed to get relief in the Courts of Munsif, Kendrapara, and Subordinate Judge, Kendrapara, has filed this second appeal.2. His case in brief is as follows:One Kelei alias Kinu Das, husband of Kanchan Dibya, defendant No. 3 sold A0.04 decimals of land from northern portion of the suit plot measuring A0.10 decimals of which he was the owner to defendants Nos. I and 2, Gourhari and Bansidhar, who are respondents Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in this appeal. On rest A0.06 decimals of land to the southern portion of the suit plot, a house is standing. Kinu died in the year 1967 leaving behind his widow Kanchan. She transferred the said A0.06 decimals of land along with the house standing thereon, and some other land over which there is no dispute in favour of plaintiff No. 1, and Brahmananda Das and Kalpataru Das, plaintiffs Nos. 2 and 3 (pro forma respondents Nos. 4 and 5 in this appeal) on 8-12-1976 for a consideration of Rs. 1,000/-, and ...

JaIn Singh and Others Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1995P& H243; (1995)109PLR614

ORDERM.S. Liberhan, J.1. Petitioner challenged the provisions of Sections 2, 3 and 5( 1) of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulations) Haryana Amendment Act, 1991 (Act No. 9 of 1992) hereinafter referred to as Act of 1992, as ultra vires of the Constitution of India.2. Succinctly, the grounds of the challenge put forth by various counsel for the petitioners in the writ petitions run as under:--(i) There is no assent of the President of India for the Act of 1992; (ii) Under the East Punjab Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1948 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'Consolidation Act' lands were reserved for common purposes by imposing a proportional cut in the holdings of the proprietors from their lands within the ceiling limits and the management of such land vested in the Gram Panchayats or the State under the Consolidation Act. Now by virtue of the Act of 1992, title, interest, vests in the Gram Panchayat. It divests the petitioners of their proprietary rights i.e. title and interest, wi...

Halwasiya Free Chikitsalya Ayurvedic Vs. Authority Appointed Under Min ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1995)110PLR120

R.P. Sethi, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of the authority under the Minimum Wages Act 1948, the present petition has been filed with the prayer for quashing the ordered Annexure P/l mainly on the ground that the notification dated 17.12.1990 is not applicable in the case of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner's dispensary is not a Hospital or Nursing Home within the meaning of the aforesaid notification. It is alternatively prayed that even if the petitioner is held to be Hospital, the impugned order imposing five times compensation is excessive and unreasonable.2. It is true that the term 'Hospital' has neither been defined in the Minimum Wages Act, (for short the 'Act) or in the notification dated 17.12.1990. Hospital according to the ordinary dictionary meaning is a place or an institution in which patients or injured are given medicine or surgical care either in whole or in part at public expense by Charity. According to Webster's New International Dictionary it mean...

Monarch Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (1995)53ITD33(Ahd.)

1. The assessee has taken 13 effective grounds challenging the order dated November 20, 1992, of the Appellate Commissioner. The sole dispute in this appeal is regarding the benefit under Section 80HHC being denied to the assessee through the order passed under Section 154 of the Act.3. In this case; income was originally assessed at Rs. nil as per assessment order dated March 30, 1989. The assessee claimed a sum of Rs. 6,03,156 as allowable deduction under Section 80HHC in respect of export sales. The Assessing Officer restricted the deduction/allowance to the extent of Rs. 5,64,973 and after setting off of business losses for the assessment years 1984-85 to 1986-87 computed the income at Rs. nil. Subsequently, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer on verification of the assessment records that the assessee-company had not furnished an audit report under Section 44AB for which the relevant form was 10CCAC along with the return nor had created any reserve as required in terms of the...