Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents amendment act 2005 section 36 amendment of section 48 Page 11 of about 49,434 results (0.388 seconds)

M/S. Aachi Masala Foods (P) Ltd. Vs. S.D. Murali, Trading as the Achi ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... be decided ignoring rule 23. 28. before the present trade marks act, 1999 and patents act, 1970 as amended came into force, the acts that were in existence was the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958 and patent act, 1970 (prior to amendment). section 108 of the trade and merchandise marks act, 1958 dealt with the procedure for application for rectification before a ..... wide as the power of appeal. the power of review will not require detailed investigation into the matter. in kapra mazdoor exta union case, (air 2005 supreme court 1782) the supreme court held that cases where decision is rendered without notice to the opposite party or under mistaken impression that the notice had ..... scrutiny of the law. (xxii) in kapra mazdoor ekta union vs. management of m/s. birla cotton spinning and weaving mills ltd., and others (air 2005 supreme court 1782) the honble supreme court held that where a court or judicial authority having jurisdiction to adjudicate on merits, can review its order on merits .....

Gemini Bay Transcription Pvt Ltd Vs. Integrated Sales Service Limited ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... not based on evidence led by the parties, and therefore, would also have to be characterised as perverse.42. given the fact that the amended act will now apply, and that the patent illegality ground for setting aside arbitral awards in international commercial arbitrations will not apply, it is necessary to advert to the grounds contained in ..... case, no such extraordinary circumstances exist. 53 whilst the decision of batts j may have been reversed by the court of appeals [404 f3 657 (2nd cir, 2005)]., i respectfully agree with his observations which are in line with the general approach taken by an enforcement court to the decision of the arbitral tribunal in question. ..... it was not a signatory, it had by its conduct rendered itself an additional party to the contract containing the arbitration agreement. in sarhank group v oracle corp (2005) 404 f3 657 the issue, on the enforcement of an egyptian award, was whether a non- signatory parent company was bound by an arbitration agreement on the .....

Cadar Constructions Vs. Tara Tiles

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1984Bom258; 1984(2)BomCR530; 1984MhLJ603

..... historical knowledge that on 19th of december 1961. this union territory was liberated, conquered in international law. by the government of india. by the constitution (12th amendment) act, passed by the parliament, this union territory was made a part of the republic of india with effect from 20th of december 1961. due to the integration ..... difficulties the president of india issued directions and promulgated regulations from time to time. we may refer to the relevant ones for understanding the points arising in this letters patent appeal. the goa. daman and diu (laws) regulation 1962. hereinafter referred to as regulation no. 12 of 1962. was promulgated by the president of india. ..... present case will be governed by article 14 of schedule to the limitation and applies the suit is barred by time entitled to show even in this letter patent appeal, that the said finding erroneous on the facts of this case is undoubtedly right in this contend with the object of showing that was within time .....

Jai Prakash Agarwal Vs. Prescribed Authority/S.D.M., Sadar, Deoria and ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 1998(4)AWC10; (1999)1UPLBEC697

..... learned single judge passed in writ petitions against orders of board of revenue and director of consolidation were abolished. by u. p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) amendment act, 1975. i.e., [u. p. act no- 31 of 1975), special appeal was abolished against orders of learned single judge passed in writ petitions arising out of judgment, order or award of tribunal ..... two judges under rule 5. however, this right of appeal was taken away by 'several amendments in clause 10 of the letters patent. initially, an amendment was made by u. p. high court (abolition of letters patent appeals. 1962 (te., u. p. act no. 14 of 1962). by this amendment, appeals from the order of the learned single judge passed in exercise of appellate jurisdiction or .....

Subharti K.K.B. Charitable Trust Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2000(1)AWC534; (2000)1UPLBEC655

..... giving the petitioner trust a reasonable opportunity of being heard in contravention of the first proviso to sub-section (4) of section 10a of the indian medical council (amendment) act. 1993.23. in the case of al-karim educational trust and another v. state of bihar and others. 1996 (8) sco 330, the question was ..... impugned order in the ends mentions that the medical council of india will conduct another inspection.18. sub-section (4) of section 10a of the indian medical council (amendment) act, 1993 provides as follows :'(4) the central government may, after considering the scheme and the recommendations of the council under sub-section (3) and after obtaining, ..... was entitled to a declaration to the effect that its medical college was deemed to have been approved under section 10a (5) of the indian medical council (amendment) act, 1993.6. the respondents filed counter-affidavits. this court on 6.5.1998 directed that another inspection be made and in this inspection the medical council of .....

Mylan (Previously Matrix) Laboratories Limited a Company Registered Un ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

..... in ora/15/2010/pt/del. the facts of the case is that: 2. the original application is for revocation of the patent no. 196774 under the provisions of the patents act, 1970 as amended by the patents (amendment) act, 2005. 3. the applicant herein filed a miscellaneous petition no. 33/2013 for taking on record 12 additional documents. the respondents filed ..... evidence. 12. in this case, the petitioner claims that these documents would show that the duty under section 8 of the patents act was breached by the respondent. after justice ayyangars report, when this act came into force, the law makers have made the failure to disclose the information required by section 8 as a ground for ..... application. 12. the observation made in para 12 of the impugned order as regards section 8 of the act was an error because of the judgement by the hon'ble delhi high court. except for us patent 221 documents, the other eleven documents are irrelevant and are not supported by pleadings. 13. the learned counsel .....

Anilkumar Phoolchand Sanghvi and Another Vs. Chandrakant P. Sanghvi an ...

Court : Mumbai

..... shall not have such original jurisdiction in cases falling within the jurisdiction of the small cause court at bombay, or the bombay city civil court. *amended by the bombay high court letters patents (amendment) act, xli of 1948. pleadings and contents of clause xii leave application and section 9 arbitration petition:- 12. the averments made for leave under clause ..... 12 has been granted. in the circumstances of the present case, therefore, the judgment dated 11-4-2005 passed by the high court of calcutta is correct and does not need any interference. civil appeal no.6691 of 2005 and civil appeal no.4808 of 2013 are hereby dismissed." 46. section 42 deals with an application filed ..... under part-i of the act before the "court" and not the "appeal". both these concepts are different. (m/s. .....

C.W.P. No.8500 of 2011 Vs. State of Haryana and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... .2001 (annexure r-2).which were issued in the light of the amendment of the constitution of india by incorporation of article 16 (4b) by the constitution (eighty firs.amendment) act, 2000, on the basis of which state government decided to amend the instructions, according to which the backlog/carry forward reserved vacancies of ..... based on correct appreciation with regard to applicability and interpretation of the instructions. the said judgement would, therefore, be per-incuriam. merely because the letters patent appeal and the special leave to appeal have been dismissed, would not make it a binding precedent. there is another ground, which dis-entitles the ..... this document civil writ petition no.8500 of2011:{ 7 }: considered and directions issued to fill up the said posts through the general category candidates. letters patent appeal no.1775 of 2012 (haryana vidyut prasaran nigam limited versus garima jindal and another).stands dismissed vide order dated 9.11.2012. special leave to .....

A. Ramanathan Vs. M/s. Tamarai Mills Ltd., A Public Limited Company, C ...

Court : Chennai

..... observed and held as follows: while dealing with the effect of section 115 of code of civil procedure after the amendment act 46 of 1999, which came into effect from 01.07.2002, the supreme court has held that such amendment has not affected the jurisdiction of the high court under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india. it ..... courts by exercising jurisdiction, which is vested in them and by not declining to exercise the jurisdiction, which is vested in them. 8. when there has been a patent perversity in the orders of the tribunals and courts subordinate to it or where there has been a gross and manifest failure of justice or the basic principles of ..... court. (g) apart from the situations pointed in (e) and (f), high court can interfere in exercise of its power of superintendence when there has been a patent perversity in the orders of the tribunals and courts subordinate to it or where there has been a gross and manifest failure of justice or the basic principles of natural .....

Partap Singh Vs. Smt. Satya Devi and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR2005HP37

..... five thousand rupees. this section came to be substituted by virtue of the provisions of section 11 of the code of civil procedure (amendment act) 1999 and section 5 of the amending act of 2002. section 16 of the amending act of 2002 saves certain appeals from the bar created by section 102 of the code and the relevant part thereof reads as under :' ..... -2001. however, this conclusion by itself has no bearing on the question of maintainability of the present appeal.9. section 102 of the code as substituted by the amending act of 2002 came into force with effect from 1-7-2002. it provides that no second appeal shall lie from any decree when the subject matter of the original ..... there was an appeal pending before the high court on 12-11-1962 i.e. the date immediately preceding the enforcement of up high court (abolition of letters patent appeals) act which came into force on 13-11-1962 which abolished the right of such appeal. against this background and in view of section 582-a of the code of .....