Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-28-2004
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 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-24-2004
Reported in : 2004(2)ARBLR280(Madras); 2004(2)CTC334; (2004)2MLJ554
..... 39(2) against a decision given by a learned single judge under section 39(1). in respect of the jurisdiction under letters patent the court observed that since arbitration act was a consolidating and amending act relating to arbitration it must be construed without any assumption that it was not intended to alter the law relating to appeals. the ..... some cases, a reference of which has been made earlier relate to the question of maintainability of a second appeal in letters patent against the appellate order passed under section 39(1) of the arbitration act as in the case of mohindra supply company (supra) where the bench of four hon'ble judges held that in view of ..... to a division bench is expressly granted. but the letters patent are declared by cl.37 subject to the legislative power of the governor-general in council and also of the governor-in-council under the government of india act, 1915, and may in all respects be amended or altered in exercise of legislative authority. under s. 39 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-30-2004
Reported in : 2004(4)CTC327; (2004)4MLJ370
..... right of renewal and that such licences issued shall cease to be valid on the expiry of 28.11.2003. this ordinance was replaced by tamil nadu prohibition (amendment) act (act 2 of 2004). this is the subject matter of challenge in these appeals. 3. mrs. nalini chidambaram, learned senior counsel, appeared for some of the petitioners, ..... the judgment and it has only to be understood that the basis of the judgment earlier rendered is taken away by repealing the rule with retrospective effect and that the amending act is constitutionally valid. mr. k.k. venugopal has cited the judgments rendered in har shankar v. dy. excise and taxation commissioner, : [1975]3scr254 , state ..... the state government for grant of licence for manufacture and sale of liquor and the state's action should not be struck down unless it appears to be patently arbitrary, irrational or mala fide. 7. in kailash chand mahajan's case (referred supra), the supreme court held that while constitutional courts may make a scrutiny .....
Tag this Judgment!