RPC 329, 338
5 1954 RPC 23, 34
6 1963 RPC 183, 202
456
admission on the part of the plaintiff that the first
respondent ... further, because a moment of time has arrived
14 (1896) 13 RPC 464
15 Rowland v. Michell, (1 897) 14 RPC
Barclay's Bank Inc
Vs. R.B.S. Advanta ( 1998 RPC 307)] where such a question
is posed and where Series 5 Software ... concerned, Justice Parker in
Pianotist Co's Application (Pianola):(1906) 23 RPC 774 (at
777) has stated as follows: "You must take
Banyan Tree Holding (P) Limited vs A. Murali Krishna Reddy & Anr. on 23 November
matter of The Pianolist Company Ltd. reported in (1906) 23 RPC 774; In the matter of M/s. R. T. Engineering & Electronics Co., reported ... Bombay 157; Stringfellow v. McCain Foods (GB) Ltd. reported in (1984) RPC 501; M/s. Victory Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. The District Judge, Ghaziabad
judicature in Electrolux Ltd. v. Electric Ltd. and another ((1954) 71 RPC 23), by House of Lords in GE Trade Marks ((1973) RPC 297) case ... statement of law from In re : Harrod's Application ((1935) 52 RPC 65).
"Now it is well recognised principle, that
Erven Warnink B. V. v. J. Townend & Sons (Hull) Ltd. (1980 RPC 31), which is known as Advocate's case, after referring ... this kind reported of which Harrods Ltd. v. Harrod Ltd. (1924 41 RPC 74), the money lender case may serve as an example
Ruling (AAR). FOWC had entered into a 'Race
Promotion Contract' (RPC) dated September 13, 2011 with Jaypee, granting
Jaypee the right to host ... payment of consideration receivable by FOWC in terms of the
said RPC from Jaypee was or was not royalty as defined in Article
Sections 302/341
of the Ranbir Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘RPC’) and
sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life ... fine of
Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302, RPC and
2
to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the offence
single judge, (Computervision Corporation v. Computer Vision Ltd.), Rep. as 1975 RPC 171. In this case Justice plowman held that two words "Computer ... noted that the said case reputed in 1975 RPC 171 was a "quia timet" action. In other words, the defendant had not started
commitment of case under Sections 304 , 323 ,
354 , 352 and 147 RPC instead of Sections 302 , 354 , 323 , 352 and 147
RPC.
3. In CRMC ... instance of one Filal under Section
452 / 147 / 354 RPC i.e. FIR No. 196/2009.
4. Case in brief is that
