Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents act 1970 39 of 1970 section 150 security for costs Court: rajasthan Year: 2010

Apr 16 2010 (HC)

Sukh Dev Vs. Prakash Chandra

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-16-2010

Prakash Tatia, J.1. The issue involved in these appeals is whether intracourt appeal lies against the order passed of the nature in writ jurisdiction by the learned Single Judge of this Court ?2. In D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 32/2010, the writ petition was labelled under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. This appeal is against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.12.2009 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11796/2009. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition after taking note of the fact that by impugned order of the trial court dated 12.10.2009, the trial court directed defendant-petitioner for discovery of documents under Order 11 Rule 14, CPC as according to the plaintiff, those documents were in possession of the defendant. This rejection of the writ petition of the writ petitioner is under challenge in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 32/2010. In the writ petition, the writ petitioner prayed that the impugned order of the trial court 12.10...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 2010 (HC)

M/S Alpha (India ) and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Rajasthan Jaipur

Decided on : Oct-29-2010

1. Since on same set of facts, similar issues have been raised, all these writ petitions are decided by this common order. For the purpose of appreciating arguments of all the parties, we have taken D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4333/2010 - 21st Century Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India and others as leading writ petition with the consent of all the learned counsel for the parties.2. The aforesaid writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-(i) The section 11(4) and section 11(B) of the Securities & Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (for short 'the SEBI Act') be declared invalid and ultra vires to the Constitution of India.(ii) The impugned order dated 8.3.2010 passed by the respondent No.2 being illegal and arbitrary be quashed and set aside.(iii) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records and papers pertaining to the impugned order and i...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //