Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents amendment act 2005 section 14 substitution of new sections for sections 14 and 15 Court: chennai Page 1 of about 384 results (0.160 seconds)

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 .....

Bajaj Auto Ltd., State of Maharashtra Rep. by S. Ravikumar Vs. Tvs Mot ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2008)ILLJ726Mad; LC2008(1)217; 2008(36)PTC417(Mad)

..... act.29. the term 'invention' is defined under section 2(j ..... england, the word patent is used denoting a monopoly right in respect of an invention.28. section 2(m) of the patents act, 1970 defines 'patent' means a patent for any invention granted under this act.the said definition itself was substituted by the patents (amendment) act, 2005 (act 15 of 2085) with effect from 01.01.2005. prior to the said amendment, section 2(m) defined 'patent' as,'patent' means a patent granted under this .....

Mariappan Vs. A.R. Safiullah,

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 2008(5)CTC97; LC2008(3)431; (2008)6MLJ1117; 2008(38)PTC341(Mad)

..... .s.a. no. 283 of 2006 the said decision requires reconsideration in view of the patents (amendment) act 2005 under which, major amendments were effected to the patents act, 1970. the learned counsel further invited the attention of this court to section 48 of the patents act, which came to be substituted by act 38 of 2002 with effect from 20.05.2003 under which, sufficient protection is granted for ..... least at the time of granting order of interim injunction.61. section 48 of the patents act, 1970 as amended by the patents (amended act 2002) with effect from 20th may, 2003) protects the rights of patentees. since we earlier held that the patent granted to the applicant/plaintiff is only a process patent, in terms of sub-section (b) of section 48, the exclusive right to prevent .....

Novartis AG, rep. by It's Power of Attorney Ms. Ritushka Negi and Anr. ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 2004(3)CTC95; 2004(29)PTC108(Mad)

..... of section 24-a and 24-b of the act primarily arise for consideration at this stage. prior to amending act 17/1999, product patent was impermissible in india. till the amending act was brought into force, process patent alone was permissible. by the amending act, existing section 5 was converted into section 5(1) (dealing with process patent) and by the amendment a new section was brought in by inserting ..... for a period of two years commencing from 1.1.2003 and expiring with 31.12.2005. i have already found that neither in the patents act nor in the patents rules, there is any amended provision as to who must apply for the marketing approval in india when a patent claim is filed in india by the inventor. therefore, this court has to necessarily look .....

Mary Thomas and ors. Vs. Dr. K.E. Thomas and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1989)2MLJ332

..... it does not exercise its ordinary or extraordinary civil jurisdiction conferred by clauses 11 to 18 of the letters patent.however, the reference to the bench became unnecessary because act 18 of 1929 was passed which amended the succession act by the insertion of the definition of district judge' as a judge of a principal civil court of original ..... the legislative powers of the state and they may be in all respects amended and altered. it is his contention that the provisions of the letters patent are not immutable and are certainly amenable to the new law enacted, namely, the family courts act. he referred to the decision of this court reported in official assignee of ..... respondent is that the provisions of the letters patent vesting jurisdiction on the original side of the high court to try certain matters which may fall under the explanation to section 7 of the act, have been altered or amended or abridged by reason of the enactment of the act, that the family court would have exclusive .....

Indian Network for People Living with Hiv/Aids, Rep. by Its President ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 2009BusLR478; 2009(1)CTC32; LC2009(2)36

..... contended by the petitioners that the indian patents (amendment) act, 2005 was passed to make the said act compliant with the obligations under trips. trips, signed in 1995, required india to effect a product patent regime after ten years. from 1995, it became clear that india would adopt a product patent regime by 2005. prior to the patents (amendment) act, 2005 the said act only granted patents for processes but not for products. therefore ..... of the pre-grant and post-grant 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', whereas prior to the said .....

immidisetti Dhanaraju and ors. Vs. Motilal Daga, Trading Under the Nam ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1929Mad641; (1929)57MLJ264

..... that section 98 applies to appeals under the civil procedure code and clause 36 of the letters patent applies to appeals under the letters patent and this was not intended to be altered by the amending act; the effect of the amending act is only to confirm the previous state of the law. there is a fallacy in ..... . mr. krishnaswami aiyangar, the learned advocate for the respondents, contended that the amending act does not lead to the conclusion that in appeals under the civil procedure code, clause 36 of the letters patent applies. his argument may be thus stated; the amending act is declaratory in its nature; it is not intended to alter the law; ..... like section 98 had been introduced into the civil procedure code of 1859 by the amending act of 1861. between 1865 and 1877, it could not be suggested that the civil procedure code prevailed over the letters patent. it was obvious that the letters patent prevailed over the civil procedure code. in case of difference of opinion between two judges .....

Sp.Chockalingam Vs. Controller of Patents

Court : Chennai

..... article 226 of the constitution of india, seeking for issuance of a writ of declaration, declaring that the amendment introduced to section 126 of the patents act, 1970, by section 67 (a) of the patents (amendment) act, 2005 (act 15 of 2005) as illegal, unconstitutional, ultra vires and void. for petitioner : mr.sp.chockalingam, party-in-person for ..... the constitution of india, seeking an order in the nature of writ of declaration, to declare the amendment introduced to section 126 of the patent act, 1970 by section 67 (a) of the patents (amendment) act, 2005 (act 15 of 2005) as illegal, unconstitutional, ultra vires and void.2. the petitioner, who appeared party-in-person ..... , as unconstitutional. however, the relief sought for in the writ petition is to declare that the amendment introduced to section 126 of the patents act, 1970, by section 67 (a) of the patents (amendment) act, 2005 (act 15 of 2005) as illegal, unconstitutional, ultra vires and void.52. hence, to meet the ends of justice, .....

The Registrar, University of Madras, Chepauk, Madras - 600005 and Othe ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1995)IIMLJ367

..... not chosen to notify the said provision, though several other provisions of the amendment act have been notified and brought into force. 64. the state commission in the above referred case proceeded to observe that the decision of the national ..... the provisions of any other law. further, after the decision in bangalore water supply and sewerage board case : (1978)illj349sc , the parliament has passed the amendment act 46 of - excluding education, scientific, research or training institution from the definition of 'industry', making clear the intention of the legislature. but, the government has ..... would include even 'religious service' and such a construction would lead to absurdity. the more clinching aspect of the matter is that even when the act was amended by act 50 of 1993, the legislature did not choose to include 'education' in the definition of 'service', while introducing 'housing construction' only. further, .....

N. Renuka Devi Vs. E. Lalitha and Another

Court : Chennai

..... , by the provisions of the code of civil procedure, being an act passed by the governor-general-in-council, and being act no.viii of 1859, and the provisions of any law which has been made amending or altering the same, by competent legislative authority for india." (letters patents of the three high courts, namely, calcutta, bombay and madras are ..... p) ltd. (balasaria construction (p). ltd. vs. hanuman seva trust - 2006 (5) scc 658) and also in narne rama murthy case (narne rama murthy vs. ravula somasundaram - 2005 (6) scc 614), that if the plea of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact, the same cannot be raised at the appellate stage. we have no problem ..... for the plaintiff relied on the following decisions: (a) 2005 (1) ctc 304 (sc) (iridium india telecom ltd. vs. motorola inc.): "2. this appeal impugns the judgment of the division bench of the high court of judicature at bombay in a letters patent appeal holding that the amended provision of order 8, rule 1 of the code of civil .....