Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents amendment act 2005 section 4 omission of section 5 Court: mumbai Page 10 of about 10,301 results (0.202 seconds)

Emperor Vs. Shaikh Hasan Abdul Karim and Akbarkhan Attamahomed

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1944Bom274; (1944)46BOMLR470

..... 1943, both the appellants had made applications to the advocate general for a certificate under clause 26 of the letters patent of this court. on december 15, 1943, the appellants filed appeals against their convictions under the amending act, and on the same day the learned advocate general adjourned sine die the hearing of the applications made to him for ..... or remedy in respect of any such right. under that provision the remedy under clause 26 of the letters patent is, in my opinion, open to the appellants in spite of the provisions of section 7 of the amending act. the accused cannot be deprived of any rights which were open to them at the time when the judgment ..... in these appeals could also be urged by them in their application under clause 26 of the letters patent. they will not therefore be prejudiced by the view which i am taking that they have no right of appeal under the amending act. both the appeals are therefore not competent and must be dismissed.weston, j.8. these are .....

Ultratech Cement Limited and Another Vs. Shree Balaji Cement Industrie ...

Court : Mumbai

..... cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this court and the plaintiffs ought not to be granted leave under clause xiv of the letters patent. 14. section 134 (2) of the act enables the registered proprietor of a trademark to institute a suit for infringement in a district court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction at the ..... 1064310644 of 2010. the defendants have also relied on the judgment of the hon'ble supreme court in the case of kusumingots and alloys ltd. vs. union of india (2005 (118) ecr 151 (sc)to contend that even if a small part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of a particular high court, the ..... originally filed, was defective and not maintainable and this alleged vested right was sought to be taken away by the amendment. in this connection, the defendant has relied upon sections 28 (3), 29 (2) and 30 (2) (e) of the act to contend that the suit for infringement cannot lie and is barred by law. the plaintiff, in response to .....

Gaurav Gupta Vs. Radhika Gupta

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... of india and others; (1997) 3 scc 261 and therefore abridgment by a constitutional amendment is also very doubtful. (j) it may be true that a statutory amendment of a rather cognate provision, like section 115 of the civil procedure code by the civil procedure code (amendment) act, 1999 does not and cannot cut down the ambit of high court's power under ..... filed complaint against the petitioner and his parents under section 12 read with sections 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 (domestic violence act, for short), claiming total sum of rs.67,500/- for maintenance of herself and the two minor children. by interim order dated 04/08/2009, ..... 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 tribunals and courts subordinate to it or where there has been a gross and manifest failure of justice or the basic principles of natural .....

Board of Trustees of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust Vs. Three Circles Con ...

Court : Mumbai

..... entire procedure followed by the learned arbitrator is in breach of principles of natural justice and shows total non-application of mind and patent illegality on the face of the award. amendments are allowed after closure of the arguments. additional issues are framed after declaring the proceedings as closed for declaring the award. no ..... learned arbitrator while deciding this issue and has committed an error which is patently illegal on the face of the award. 25. he submits that the impugned amendments allowed by the learned arbitrator are contrary to section 23 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996. he submits that since the respondent had invoked arbitration agreement in ..... arbitrator permitted the respondent to file affidavit of evidence of mr.v.t.ganpule. the respondent filed fresh affidavit of mr.v.t.ganpule on 6th january, 2005 who was cross examined by the petitioner. 14. it is the case of the petitioner that after completion of the cross examination of mr.v.t.ganpule .....

M/s. Visakha Petroleum Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. B.L. Bansal, Sole Arbitr ...

Court : Mumbai

..... agreement as void. learned arbitrator, in my view, has exceeded jurisdiction by declaring clause 10.2 as void in view of the amendment to section 28 of the indian contract act, 1872 and has committed patent illegality on the face of the award. 63. in my view, there is no merit in the submission of the-learned counsel ..... liability thereafter. 46. the division bench of this court in the case of reliance industries limited vs. p and o containers limited and anr., reported in air 2005 bom 65 has interpreted a similar clause and after following the judgment of the supreme court of east and west steamship co., georgetown, madras (supra) and various ..... s.k. ranalingam chettiar (supra) and followed by this court in the case of reliance industries limited vs. p and o containers limited and anr., reported in air 2005 bom 65. the expression 'discharged from liability' would mean a total extinction of liability following upon the extinction of right. the words 'absolved from liability' and 'discharged .....

Bayer Corporation United States of America Vs. Union of India through ...

Court : Mumbai

..... to which india is a party. vi) scheme of compulsory licence under the act: 9) consequent to trips, the act was amended in 1999, 2002 and 2005 to make it trips compliant. in fact, chapter xvi of the act dealing with working of patent, compulsory licenses and revocation was substituted in its entirety by the 2002 amendment which come into effect on 20 february 2003. further, changes ..... /amendments were made in 2005. the framework of chapter xvi of the act is briefly as under .....

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. Ciba Pharma Private Limi ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1965)67BOMLR792; [1965]57ITR428(Bom)

..... raised by boots pure drug company challenging the validity of the aforesaid patents in india. may & baker, therefore, had to amend the specifications as contemplated by section 18 of the patents and designs act, 1911. after the amendment, the suit was withdrawn and it was stated on behalf of ..... was maintaining and continuously developing chemical, medical, biological, bacteriological and pharmaceutical research laboratories, factory laboratories, standardization departments, engineering departments and propaganda and patent departments. ciba basle, therefore, had acquired valuable scientific knowledge, research methods, data and material concerning its activities in the aforesaid sphere of ..... may & baker by the learned advocate-general that he was not proceeding with the action of infringement of the patents of the amended .....

Nina Dalal Vs. Merwanji Pheeozshaw Dalal

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1930)32BOMLR1046

..... in wadia v. wadia the legislature has made its intention quite clear by providing in an amending act, viz., act xxx of 1927, that as long as either the petitioner or the respondent professed the christian religion the provisions of the act would be applicable. i agree with the order perposed by my lord the chief justice.broomfield, ..... . then mr. setalvad contended that as section 4 merely confirmed the old jurisdiction, and as that old jurisdiction, as fixed by clause 35 of the letters patent* was to be exercised as between christians only, then section 4 must simply mean that the jurisdiction in matrimonial matters as between christians is to be exercised ..... professing the christian religion, and that such jurisdiction shall extend to the local limits within which the supreme court now has ecclesiastical jurisdiction.11. by the amended letters patent of 1865 this local limit is omitted and the corresponding clause 35 runs :-and we do further ordain that the said high court of judicature at .....

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)220CTR(Bom)425; [2009]310ITR320(Bom); [2009]177TAXMAN81(Bom)

..... by way of technical fees and (3) reimbursement of expenses, are taxable in india considering the provisions of section 9 of the it act as amended w.e.f. 1st june, 1976.18. the finance act, 2007 has inserted the explanation to section 9(1) with retrospective effect from 1st june, 1976. the supreme court in ishikawqjma-harima ..... dt. 23rd feb., 1973 between siemens india ltd. and the assessee. under this agreement the assessee had agreed to provide to siemens india ltd., relevant patents, patent applications and utility models, relevant written material, experience and information regarding certain contract products. the assessee was to be paid a royalty of 3 per cent ..... supreme court has emphasised is the rendering of services in india. in the present case if the consideration received by the respondent for grant of the patents and license is regarded as royalty as the grant admittedly took place outside india, the question of the deeming provisions applying having regard to the interpretation .....

Jer Rutton Kavasmaneck @ Jer Jawahar Thadani and Another Vs. Gharda Ch ...

Court : Mumbai

..... a private company or to a company which has become public company. section 111a(2) is also not applicable and in these circumstances, the impugned order is patently erroneous and unsustainable and should be set aside. mr.samdani has taken me through the paras of the company petition and he read out almost all affidavits ..... whether the appellants are entitled to challenge the conduct of the impugned eogm as well as the rulings given by the chairman on the ground that the same were patently illegal, mala fide and a part of the preconceived deliberate oppressive design? j. whether the clb could not have permitted the 1st respondent to implement the resolution ..... made by them. further according to mr.bobde, even the act of unjust enrichment of respondent no.2 as alleged was taken up and raised in amendment application (ca 403 of 2005), which company application was moved in company petition no.77 of 1990 on 18th march 2005. even that issue cannot be raised because of unconditional withdrawal of .....