Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Oct-15-1986
Reported in : 1987(12)ECC310
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. The writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by Dabur (Dr. S.K. Burman) Private Limited, Sahibabad, district Ghaziabad and Jagat Singh Bisht, who was the wholesale dealer of Dabur products, carrying on his business in Almora. The reliefs sought for by this petition is for quashing of the notifications, the details of which would be given at appropriate places in this judgment, and for mandamus directing the State of U.P. and the Excise Commissioner as also its officers from interfering with the business of the petitioners in Ayurvedic medicines, including Mrit Sanjiwani Sura, in pursuance of the impugned notifications and the Rules published by respondents 1 and 2 on 14th September, 1978.2. For discussing the points urged, since it is necessary to make a brief reference of the relevant provisions of the U.P. Excise Act, we hereby do so. Amongst the various objects of the aforesaid Act enumerated in its Preamble, one of them is to carry into ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Feb-17-1986
Reported in : AIR1987All338
ORDERB.D. Agarwal, J.1. This revision is directed against an order of the Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad, dated 23rd Sept., 1982.2. The plaintiff brought a suit giving rise to this revision in the Court of the District Judge, Ghaziabad, contending that, the plaintiff holds patent No. 140164, dated Jan.31, 1974, and that the plaintiff is recorded in the Register of Patents on Nov. 21 1980, as such. There is allegedly infringement of the patent from the side of the defence and hence the relief sought in the suit is permanent injunction besides requiring the defendant to render account to the plaintiff of profits made by the defendant by using a machine containing the plaintiffs invention. The amount thus found due is also sought to be recovered. In defence it is asserted that there is no valid patent held as such by the plaintiff and no relief can be had on the basis of the averments contained in the plaint Subsequent to the defence being put in, there was an application filed by t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Aug-13-1986
Reported in : AIR1987All279
ORDERB.D. Agrawal, J.1. Election in the Lok Sabha Constituency No. 68 Farrukhabad took place as part of the General Elections in Nov./Dec. 1984. Last date for filing nomination was Nov. 27, 1984. The scrutiny took place on 28th Nov. Withdrawal could be had up to 30th Nov. Poll took place on Dec. 24, 1984 followed by couting counting on Dec. 28 and 29th. The respondent was declared elected defeating the thirteen rival candidates including the petitioner. The respondent secured 2,36,892 votes; the votes obtained by the petitioner were 1177. The petitioner has filed this petition challenging the election of the respondent on grounds stated in paras 5 of the petition as under : --(A) Because the result of the election, in so far as it concerns the respondent, has been materially affected by the non-compliance with the provisions of Sections 33 and 36 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the conduct of Election Rules. The material facts and particulars regarding this ground are...
Tag this Judgment!