Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents amendment act 2005 section 78 repeal and saving Sorted by: recent Court: guwahati Page 1 of about 25 results (0.108 seconds)

Kanchi Sankara Health and Educational Foundation Vs. State of Assam

Court : Guwahati

..... of the anesthesiology department and therefore the senior doctor does not come within the definition of workman under section 2(a) of the i.d.act. 6. referring to the amendment brought through the amending act 46 of 1982, whereby definition of industry under section 2(j) was substituted by excluding hospitals from the preview of the definition, the declaration ..... whether the nethrayala hospital should be placed outside the definition of industry , by application of the changed definition incorporated in the i.d. act, through the amending act 46 of 1982. in the context of the amendment in section 2(s), the supreme court in coir board, ernakulam cochin v. indira devi p.s., 1998 (3) scc 259, ..... a months salary in lieu of one months notice exercising the option under clause-iii of the appointment order, the service of the doctor was terminated on 18.6.2005 (annexure-4) and his salary of rs.44,744/- for 1 month was tendered in lieu of notice for the terminated doctor. 3. the aggrieved respondent .....

Tolaram Bafna Artificial Limb and Caliper Centre and Others Vs. The St ...

Court : Guwahati

..... for certain information from the public information officer in the office of the deputy commissioner, kamrup (rural) as per the provisions of the right to information act, 2005 including the copy of the mou dated 11/06/2012. the petitioners also wanted to have the information as to whether the respondent no. 4 had ..... their nominee representative and deputy commissioner, kamrup or his nominee representative and the arbitration proceeding shall be governed by the provision of arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 or any amendment made thereto. clause 9 the gauhati high court and its subordinate courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction to try any matter relating to this mou. ..... which the writ petition has been structured are not valid ground to interfere with the same. the decisions on which he has placed reliance are as follows :- 1. (2005) 2 scc 689 (president, poornathrayisha seva sangham, thripunithura vs. k. thilakan kavenal and others). 2. (2012) 8 scc 216 (michigan rubber (india) ltd. vs .....

The State of Assam and Others, in Re.

Court : Guwahati

..... the review petitioner and it was open to him to raise these points in that proceeding as by that time the juvenile justice( care and protection of children) act, 2000 as amended by the 2006 amendment act had come into force. 90. even though the ambit of the review petition has been widened by this court in eswara(supra), it has to follow broadly ..... a juvenile in conflict with law as defined, even if he/she has ceased to be so on or before the date of commencement of the act i.e. 1.4.2001 is not only patent on the face thereof, but also is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the apex court in hari ram vs. state of ..... .gdj.138/2000/52 dated 20.12.02. 5. in the writ petition filed by the victims relatives before the honble apex court registered as writ petition (civil) no.457/2005 the aforementioned order of commutation was set aside on 5.9.2009. the applicant thereafter approached the honble apex court with a review petition being review petition( civil) no.1378 .....

The State of Assam and Others, in Re.

Court : Guwahati

..... the review petitioner and it was open to him to raise these points in that proceeding as by that time the juvenile justice( care and protection of children) act, 2000 as amended by the 2006 amendment act had come into force. 90. even though the ambit of the review petition has been widened by this court in eswara(supra), it has to follow broadly ..... of this court in nabam amas vs. state of arunachal pradesh, 2010 (1) g lt 622 and binoy biswas vs. state of assam passed in crl. appeal (j) no.2/2005 to buttress his contentions. 12. we have lent our anxious consideration to the pleaded facts, records/documents laid before us and the authorities cited for eludicitation of the propositions advanced ..... a juvenile in conflict with law as defined, even if he/she has ceased to be so on or before the date of commencement of the act i.e. 1.4.2001 is not only patent on the face thereof, but also is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the apex court in hari ram vs. state of .....

J.P. Rai, Ias Vs. the State of Arunachal Pradesh and ors.

Court : Guwahati

Reported in : AIR2009Gau151

..... former letters patent mentioned, inter alia, that clause 36 referred to the powers of single judges and division courts appointed or ..... years of our region.' reference in the extracted portion aforesaid is to section 13 of the charter act. the said extracted portion was substituted by the words 'in pursuance of section one hundred and eight of the government of india act, 1915' by the amendment letters patent of march 11, 1919.13. paragraph 35 of the dispatch from the secretary of state accompanying the .....

Jaiprakash Associates Limited (Cement Devision) Vs. State of Arunachal ...

Court : Guwahati

..... the facilities to the tax-payers to facilitate the trade, section 8a has been inserted by the second amendment act of 2005 with effect from may 12, 2005....113. from the provision of section 8a as inserted by the second amendment act of 2005, it is evident that the amount collected by way of tax is proposed to be spent for ..... of the tax and the facilities provided. whenever a levy is impugned as violative of article 301, the court has to determine if the impugned enactment, facially and patently, indicates any quantifiable data on the basis of which the compensatory tax is levied. such a legislation, if put to challenge, must facially indicate the benefit, ..... is compensatory or not was to enquire whether the traders, as a class, are having the use of certain facilities for better conduct of their business and paying not patently much more than what is required for providing facilities, the decision, in bhagatram rajeev kumar : 1994(4)scale1103 , reflected that even if some 'link', direct or .....

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (Guwahati Refinery) Vs. State of Assam and ...

Court : Guwahati

..... the rates of tax of the goods specified in the schedule and thereupon the said schedule shall be deemed to have been amended accordingly, [deleted by assam entry tax (second amendment) act, 2005 with effect from may 12, 2005]5. exemption from tax.-notwithstanding anything contained in section 3 and section 4, and subject to production of documentary proof, ..... is compensatory or not is to enquire whether the trades people are having the use of certain facilities for the better conduct of their business and paying not patently much more than what is required for providing the facilities.51. the above law declared in automobile transport (rajasthan) ltd. air 51 1962 sc 1406 came ..... is compensatory or not is to enquire whether the trades people are having the use of certain facilities for the better conduct of their business and paying not patently much more than what is required for providing the facilities. it would be impossible to judge the compensatory nature of a tax by a meticulous test, .....

Assam Roller Flour Mills Association and ors. Vs. State of Assam and o ...

Court : Guwahati

..... section 21(1), 21(2), 21(3), 21a, 23 and 25(xiii) of the assam agricultural produce market act, 1972 as amended by assam agricultural produce market (amendment) act, 2000 and the assam agricultural produce market (amendment) act,2006 with the consequential relief of refund of the cess collected thereunder by the respondents together with the interest @ 15 ..... % thereon for the period 13.08.2001 to 08.12.2005 and till such time the same is exacted from the petitioners. ..... chemical works ltd., are out and out its stock transfers and by no means involved in sale or purchase, the realization of cess by the board is patently illegal and invalid. the decisions of the apex court in 1980 (supp) scc 27, ram chandra kailash kumar and co. and ors. v. state of .....

Raj International Vs. Tripura Jute Mills Ltd.

Court : Guwahati

..... the jurisdiction conferred by the aforesaid articles can only be curtailed or executed with respect to any matter by constitutional amendment and not by other ordinary legislation and/or in other way whatever may be the mode. now, if the ..... of supervision cannot be so equated with power of revision. as a matter of fact court will strike down a patently illegal exercise of jurisdiction in exercise of the power of superintendence. i am therefore unable to uphold the contention of ..... their two applications wherein question of jurisdiction was raised, but did not give any decision.13. on 29.8.2005, the petitioner made another letter to the sole arbitrator through its advocate referring its two application dated 22.1.2004 ..... with the arbitration agreement, the arbitrator has not been appointed in accordance with the arbitration agreement and failure to act in accorrance with the arbitration agreement between the parties vtitiated the appointment of the arbitrator and hence the arbitrator has .....

Real Mazon India Ltd. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... the overwhelming purpose of the scheme and the state's responsibility for the due accomplishment thereof.52. besides as the state authorities have resorted to the amendments readily acting on the representations by the tac holders including respondents 6,7,8 and 9 enabling them, otherwise not eligible, to participate in the process, ..... west bengal contended that the same only reinforces the petitioner's contentions. in all, mr. goswami urged that the tender process in the present form is patently illegal and unconstitutional and is therefore liable to be adjudged inoperative, nonest and void.53. mr. dutta as against this submitted that their being no ..... the requirement of experience initially incorporated in the notice inviting tender was deleted. though the challenge thereto before the calcutta high court in wp(c) 2083/ 2005 was negated the related slp(c) 11621/ 2006 by shimnit utsch india pvt. ltd. and another against west bengal transport infrastructure development corporation limited and .....