Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents amendment act 2005 section 24 omission of section 27 Court: chhattisgarh Page 1 of about 60 results (0.497 seconds)

V.K. Walnekar and ors. Vs. Bilaspur Raipur Kshetriya GramIn Bank and a ...

Court : Chhattisgarh

Reported in : AIR2006Chh92

..... by operation of law i.e., by coming into force of the m. p. uchha nyayalay (letters patent appeal samapti) adhiniyam 1981. it is in between this period of 27-8-1984 and 11-1-2005, the m.p. reorganisation act 2000 came into force and high court of chhattisgarh was created as an effect of section 21 of the ..... appropriate government may, before the expiration of two years from that day, by order, make such adaptations and modifications of the law, whether by way of repeal or amendment, as may be necessary or expedient, and thereupon every such law shall have effect subject to the adaptations and modifications so made until altered, repealed or ..... erstwhile state of madhya pradesh and creation of the new state of chhattisgarh. they continue in force until and unless altered, repealed or amended. a similar view in relation to sections 84 & 85 of bihar reorganization act 2000 has been taken by the apex court in the matter of commissioner of commercial taxes, ranchi and anr. v. swarn rekha cokes .....

High Court Bar Association Through its Secretary, Chhattisgarh Vs. Sta ...

Court : Chhattisgarh

..... that they are violative of article 14 of the constitution. therein, the uttar pradesh high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) (amendment) ordinance, 1972 later replaced by u.p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) (amendment) act (32 of 1972) abolished remedy of appeal against a particular class of litigation arising on a particular subject matter. ..... by holding that in view of judgment of the supreme court in the case of jamshed n. guzdar v. state of maharashtra (jt 2005 (1) sc 370) stood revived and letters patent appeal were no longer maintainable. as result, the intra court appeal remedy remained no longer available in this court. 9. in this background ..... 8 : (air 2009 sc 1349) in which an issue with regard to maintainability of appeal under m.p. uchcha nyayalaya (khand nyayapeeth ko appeal) adhiniyam, 2005 was involved and where the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable, the supreme court upon survey of its decisions right from the case of hari vishnu kamath v. .....

Kailash Murarka Vs. K. Geet Srijan

Court : Chhattisgarh

..... grievance by filing complaint, has a right to redress the grievance in case of acquittal under section 378(4) of the code by filing petition for leave to appeal. vide amending act no. 5/2009, the word 'victim' has been defined under clause (wa) of section 2 of the code and right to appeal against the judgment of acquittal has been ..... the order of acquittal is passed in a case instituted upon the complaint, has been provided under sub-section (4) of section 378 of the code. subsequently, vide amending act no. 5 of 2009, proviso to section 372 of the code has been added with effect from 31-12-2009 whereby right to appeal against the judgment of acquittal has ..... 35 lindley, mr. in 1898 found the rule "as necessary now as it was when lord coke reported heydon's case". in eastman photographic material company v. comptroller general of patents, designs and trade marks, lr, [1898] ac 671, 576 earl of halsbury re-affirmed the rule as follows: "my lords, it appears to me that to construe the statute .....

Omprakash Dubey Vs. Kapuri Bai and Others

Court : Chhattisgarh

..... trustee or towards the members whom he stoods in such capacity. as per pleading of the original plaintiff radhikacharan dubey the property was self-acquired property, therefore, subsequent amendment in the plaint by the respondents that it was joint hindu family property was not permissible under order 22 rule 3 of the code. learned counsel contended that although ..... for others. inter alia, it has been specifically pleaded that the owner was the plaintiff and he has purchased the property in the name of the present appellant. 21. patently case of the present respondents or original plaintiff do not fall within the exception of clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 3 or clause (a) and ..... in respect of any property held benami in terms of sub-section (1) of section 4 of the act, 1988. 22. in terms of order 22 rule 3 (1) of the code, the present respondents were not entitled to amend their plaint or make claim other than the claim of original plaintiff. as per pleading of the plaintiff the .....

Madan Singh and ors. Vs. Sudhir Kumar Agrawal

Court : Chhattisgarh

Reported in : 2004(4)MPHT28(CG)

..... is not considered which, if considered would have led to an opposite conclusion. this principle has been laid in relation to section 100, cpc after the 1976 amendment. the second situation in which interference with findings of fact is permissible is where a finding has been arrived at by the appellate court by placing reliance ..... tuition classes for his students), held, high court was justified in not interfering and in dismissing appellant tenant's second appeal- rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act, 1950 (17 of 1950), section 13(1)(h)- civil procedure code, 1908, section 100.' 11. learned counsel for the respondent has also relied upon the judgment of the ..... interest. further held, such provisions arc enacted to take care of situations where the landlords are too weak and feeble and feel humble - east punjab urban rent restrictions act, 1949 (3 of 1949). section 13(3)(a)(ii)(a).' 8. learned counsel further relied on a decision in the case of ishwar das jain (dead) through .....

Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board and Etc. Vs. Vishal Agrawal and o ...

Court : Chhattisgarh

Reported in : AIR2008Chh57

..... placed on the orders passed in the matters of sheikh mohd. khalil v. state of m.p. 2005 (4) mplj 479 and chabi rani ghosh v. cesc ltd. air 2006 noc 171.17. it is further argued that in the meanwhile electricity (amendment) act, 2007 came into force w.e.f. june 15, 2007 and in section 151 of the principal ..... a special court shall be competent to take cognizance of an offence without the accused being committed to it for trial.1. short title and commencement.- (1) this act may be called the electricity (amendment) act, 2007.(2) it shall come into force on such date as the central government may, by notification in the official gazette, appoint.15 ..... the party in sufferance is a respondent to the us or proceedings cannot confer any further sanctity or authority and validity which it is shown and found to obviously and patently lack.35. in babaji kondaji garad : [1984]1scr767 also it has been held that if there is conflict between the statute and the subordinate legislation, the statute prevails .....

Meva Devi and ors. Etc. Vs. Omprakash Jagannath Agrawal and ors. Etc.

Court : Chhattisgarh

Reported in : AIR2008Chh13

..... his sons including the defendants and the plaintiff, it has been argued that explanation (2) of section 6 of the hindu succession act, 1956, as it existed before the amendment act, 2005, stipulates that the defendants who were separated from the coparcenary before the death of jainarayan cannot claim share in the interest referred to ..... after the death of late jainarayan, the share of the jainarayan would devolve as per section 8 of the hindu succession act amongst all the heirs of jainarayan.28. prior to hindu succession amendment act, 2005, section 6 read as under:6. devolution of interest in coparcenary property.- when a male hindu dies after the commencement ..... of this act having at the time of his death an interest in a mitakshara coparcenary property, his interest in the property .....

Rungta College of Engineering and Technology Bhilai and Others Vs. Sta ...

Court : Chhattisgarh

..... private unaided colleges and that in that regard there shall be no difference between the minority and non- minority institutions. however, by the constitution (ninety-third amendment) act, 2005, article 15 is amended. it is given article 15(5). the result is that p.a. inamdar has been overruled on two counts: (a) whereas this court in p.a ..... -minority institutions, the amendment decreed that there shall be a difference." 39. in modern dental college and research centre (supra), the supreme court observed as under : "12. a five-judge ..... . inamdar had stated that there shall be no reservation in private unaided colleges, the amendment decreed that there shall be reservations; (b) whereas this court in p.a. inamdar had said that there shall be no difference between the unaided minority and non .....

Prashant Kumar Vs. State of C.G.

Court : Chhattisgarh

Reported in : AIR2006Chh1; 2005(4)KLT159

..... to adoption of a general rule disabling itself from exercising discretion in individual cases, and the same is based on considerations extraneous to those contemplated in the amending act. the order impugned is hit by the general rule that while exercising the statutory discretion the authority must not shut (his) ears to the application. even ..... 'be entitled', they have been replaced by the words 'may' and renew. therefore, automatic renewal and entitlement have been taken away by the amended act no. 36 of 1999.11. section 6 of the act envisages 'annual publication of lists of notaries', section 7 envisages about the 'seal of notaries', section 8 envisages about the 'functions of notaries ..... and (2) of section 5 the word 'shall' was there which has been replaced by the word 'may' vide amending act no. 36 of 1999. a comparative table of unamended and amended provisions of the act would show the correct picture.(a) in sub-section (1) of section 5:old newevery notary who intends to practice as .....

Smt. Kumari Bai and anr. Etc. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and anr. Etc.

Court : Chhattisgarh

Reported in : AIR2006Chh52; 2006(3)MPHT42(CG)

..... from 1-2-1977. there is a lot of case law highlighting the objects of the notice required under sub-section (1) of section 80 cpc before and after its amendment by amendment act no. 104 of 1976. as held by the supreme court in raghunath das v. union of india : [1969]1scr450 , state of punjab v. geeta iron and brass ..... support of his submission cited judgments of the supreme court in smt. ganga bai v. vijay kumar : [1974]3scr882 , salem advocate bar association, tamil nadu v. union of india air 2005 sc 3353; mardia chemicals ltd. v. union of india : air2004sc2371 and mahesh chandra v. regional manager, u.p. financial corporation : [1992]1scr616 .9. mr. v. v. s ..... the court of first civil judge, class-i, raipur along with an application for grant of injunction. after service of summons, the municipal corporation on 17-3-2005 made an application under order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure contending that the suit is not maintainable for non-compliance of statutory provisions of section .....