0 Patents Act 1970 39 of 1970 Section 150 Security for Costs - Sortby Old - Court Privy Council - Year 1898 - Judgments | SooperKanoon Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents act 1970 39 of 1970 section 150 security for costs Sorted by: old Court: privy council Year: 1898

Aug 10 1898 (PC)

theivu Pandithan and anr. Vs. Secretary of State for India and

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-10-1898

Reported in : (1898)ILR21Mad433

Subramania Ayyar, J.1. The question raised in these cases is one of considerable importance to a large class of persons who plant and grow, as they are permitted to do by the rules of the Government applicable to the Tinnevelly district, palmyra trees on assessed Government sandy tracts, which abound in some parts of the district and which, though scarcely suited for any other kind of cultivation, are well adapted for the growth of the palmyra palm. The question is when a person grows on a piece of assessed Government land such trees in sufficient numbers and fairly closely over the land, so as to form, in the language of the people accepted by the Revenue authorities themselves, a tope' (paragraphs 3 and 9, Extract M. C, 31st May 1855, No. 655, and paragraph 7, extract from the Proceedings of the Board of Revenue, 6th May 1858, No. 1617, in Exhibit XXXIX), what right does the planter acquire in that piece of land by so planting therein? It is not the case of either party that, when on...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 1898 (PC)

Chakkara Chappan Vs. MoidIn Kutti

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-28-1898

Reported in : (1898)8MLJ231

H.H. Shephard, C.J.1. The first question is whether any appeal lies under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent from orders passed under the provisions of Section 622 of the Civil Procedure Code. Considering this question with exclusive reference to the language used by the framers of the Letters Patent and the Charter Act, I should have great difficulty in holding that Clause 15, read as it must be with Section 13 of the statute, was intended to give a right of appeal in such matters. In order to hold that orders passed on revision come within the scope of Clause 13 it must be held that they are made by the High Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. But for the opinion expressed in Allahabad shortly after the passing of the statute and practically acquiesced in by all the High Courts since that time, I should have thought that the power of superintendence conferred on the High Courts by Section 15 of the statute stood quite apart and distinct from their appellate jurisdiction...

Tag this Judgment!


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