Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents amendment act 2005 section 14 substitution of new sections for sections 14 and 15 Page 1 of about 9,415 results (0.359 seconds)

Neon Laboratories Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Troikaa Pharma Limited, and ors.

Court : Mumbai

..... of ten years transition facility given under the wto agreement that further amendments had to be made and that is how amendment act 15 of 2005 came to be enacted. so far as the patents (amendment) act, 2005 is concerned, while dealing with the proposed amendments to section 25 this is what is stated in clause 23 of ..... postgrant procedure vide sections 25(1) and 25(2) of the said act has been brought about by the patent amendment act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said amendment'). a perusal of the statement of objects and reasons of the said amended act would clarify the legislative intent of giving right of objection to 'any person ..... petitioner, invited our attention to the patents act, 1970 and particularly the scheme thereunder in relation to the grant of patent. mr.grover submits that the patents act, 1970 has been extensively amended by the patents (amendment) act, 2005. it is submitted by him that sections 25 and 26 in the old act have been substituted and the statements of .....

F. Hoffmann-la Roche Ltd. and anr. Vs. Cipla Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 159(2009)DLT243; LC2009(2)1; 2009(40)PTC125(Del)

..... that in terms of the second proviso to section 11-a(7) of the patents act 1970, introduced by the patents (amendment) act, 2005 (effective from 1st january, 2005), in case of patent applications filed under section 5 (2) [which concerns a claim for patent of an invention for a substance itself intended for use, or capable of being used ..... , as medicine or drug] the rights of a patentee accrue only from the date of the grant of the patent ..... admit of a wide scope given the legislative intent in introducing the above definition by the amendment act, 2005. it appears that this was introduced in acknowledgement of the fact that a claim by an applicant for a patent anywhere in the world and the statements made therein would be relevant for the authority in .....

India Nippon Electricals Limited Vs. Bajaj Auto Limited and Another

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... have been introduced, namely, a pre-grant opposition and post-grant opposition under section 25 of the patents act, 1970 (as amended by the patents amendment act, 2005). consequently, in the patents act, 1970 as amended by the patents (amendments) act, 2005 there does not lie any appeal to the party aggrieved in the pre-grant opposition under section 25( ..... have been conducted and finalised after the patents act, 1970 as amended by the patents (amendments) act, 2005 came into force. the general rule is that statutes are not to be construed as having retrospective operation unless such ..... 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 .....

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

..... 293/06 was filed in the high court, chapter xix of the parent act as amended vide patents (amendment) act, 1999 continued to be in operation notwithstanding the enactment of the patents (amendment) act, 2002 and the patents (amendment) act, 2005 as the amended sections 116 and 117a were brought into force only vide notification dated 2.4 ..... amendments to sections 116 and 117a suggested by section 47 of the patents (amendment) act, 2002, on 4.4.2005 the legislature enacted the patents (amendment) act, 2005. even here, not all provisions were simultaneously brought into force. only certain sections of the patents (amendment) act, 2005 were brought into force.13. vide section 23 of the patents (amendment) act, 2005, ..... 293/06 in the high court under section 116, as it stood on 19.10.06 under the patents (amendment) act, 1999. on that date, the amended section 117a, suggested by patents (amendment) act, 2005, was not brought into force. on 19.10.06 the old law prevailed under which an appeal lay .....

Vajara Yojna Seed Farm and ors. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court Ii ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (2003)1UPLBEC496

..... writ petition against the labour court award has been specifically excluded by the u.p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act. 1962 as amended by the uttar pradesh high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) (amendment) act, 1981. sri baghel referred to and relied on judgment of apex court in : [1996]2scr224 , firdosh fatima ..... further contended that appellant has not challenged the vires of the u.p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act, the u.p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act, 1962 or 1981 amendment act in this special appeal, hence he cannot be allowed to raise the said submission. he further contended that ..... ors. v. deputy director of consolidation and ors., had upheld the validity of the uttar pradesh high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act, 1962 as well as amendment act 33 of 1972. the relevant constitutional entries pertaining to state legislature regarding abolition of special appeals in the high court has been .....

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

Court : Delhi

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

..... official gazette. 22. on the date when the instant appeals were filed, chapter xix of the principal act, i.e. the patents act, 1970 as amended vide amendment act of 1999 continued to be operative notwithstanding the enactment of the patent amendment act, 2002 and the patent amendment act, 2005 since section 47 of the amendment act of 2002 which replaced chapter xix was being brought into force.23. 2 notifications were published in the ..... for the respondent urged that the tribunals can hear an appeal only against orders passed under sub-section 4 of section 25 of the patent amendment act, 1970 as amended by the patent amendment act of 2002 read with the patent amendment act, 2005. counsel urged that the amended provisions came into force on 2.4.2007. counsel wondered as to how can a board hear an appeal against an order passed .....

Ucb Farchim Sa Vs. Cipla Ltd. and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : LC2010(1)278

..... fao no. 293/06 in the high court under section 116, as it stood on 19.10.06 under the patents (amendment) act, 1999. on that date, the amended section 117a, suggested by patents (amendment) act, 2005, was not brought into force. on 19.10.06 the old law prevailed under which an appeal lay before the high ..... 06 and fao no. 293/06. we have to decide the fate of these pending appeals. one more aspect needs to be mentioned. under the patents (amendment) act, 2005, appeal is provided to the appellate board against the order of the controller under section 25(4). however, that statutory appeal is maintainable only in ..... passed by the controller of patents (controller.) either allowing or rejecting a pre-grant opposition filed under section 25(1) of the patents act, 1970 (patents act.).2. before discussing the facts of the individual cases the scheme of the patents act, particularly after the amendment to the relevant provisions by way of patents (amendment) act, 2005 (amendment act.) as well as the .....

Krishna Autar Mittal Son of Sri Ram Bharosey Lal and Ghanshyam Das Son ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR2007All90

..... upheld the validity of the u.p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act, 1962 as well as amendment act 33 of 1972. the relevant constitutional entries pertaining to state legislature regarding abolition of special appeals in the high court has been considered by ..... in firdosh fatima's case (supra). there is no scope for any argument regarding challenge to vires of the uttar pradesh high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) (amendment) act, 1981. the constitution bench of this courtin hasinuddin khan and ors. v. deputy director of consolidation and ors. 0044/1979 : [1980]2scr1207 had ..... paragraph 49:49. the second limb of submission of counsel for the appellant was to the effect that the uttarpradesh high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) (amendment) act, 1981 is ultra vires. the counsel for the respondents has rightly pointed out that there being no prayer in the special appeal for declaring the .....

Novartis AG represented by It's Power of Attorney Ranjna Mehta Dutt Vs ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2007)4MLJ1153

..... of a known process; machine or aparatus unless such known process results in a new product or employs atleast one new reactant.section 3(d) as amended by the patents (amendment) act, 2005 with effect from 01.01.2005: the mere discovery of a new form of a known substance which does not result in the enhancement of the known efficacy of that substance or the ..... parties on both sides and then passes an order, either granting the patent or rejecting the patent application, by giving reasons. prior to the amended section was brought into the statute book by the patent (amendment) act, 2005 (act 15/2005) with effect from 01.01.2005, it was preceded by ordinance 7/2004 containing the proposed amendment to be made to section 3(d). in the earlier portion of this .....

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

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2006(3)CHN577

..... is set aside and the matter is remitted to the controller.11. the position is disputed by counsel for the petitioners. according to him, even after the patents (amendment) act, 2005, doing away with the regime of grant of exclusive marketing rights, the application submitted by the petitioners for such right has not lost its utility. he points ..... the examiner . he was bound to give due regard to it.9. it is argured by counsel for the respondents that in view of provisions of the patents (amendment) act, 2005, section 78, nothing remains to be decided in the present case. he says that in view of that section 78 application of the petitioners, if is directed ..... the petitioners was not pending, and rather it had been disposed of before the cut off date, i.e. january 1, 2005.12. his contention is that provisions of section 78 of the patents (amendment) act, 2005 have no manner of application to proceedings which had stood concluded before the appointed date. he argues that if today the impugned .....