Andhra Pradesh Court November 1981 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
C. Krishna Reddy and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-20-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ592
Madhava Rao, J. 1. This is a petition filed for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to release the detenus. Various grounds have been urged in this petition. The detenus are (1) C. Krishna Reddy and (2) P. Chennaiah. In support of the petition C. Bhanumathi, the wife of the 1st detenu C. Krishna Reddy filed an affidavit wherein it is stated that the detenus belonged to the lower cadre of the Andhra Pradesh State Police Force. The first detenu C. Krishna Reddy is a Sub-Inspector while the second detenu P. Chennaiah is a Head Constable. The lower cadre of the police department was very much exploited and the service conditions virtually deprived them of all human rights. The subordinate officers were asked to work round the clock without any allowance for their food and tiffin being paid. They had to work over-time as slaves under their superior gazetted officers. They were also asked to do all menial and odd jobs not connected with their official work. Their r...
Vantaku Appalanaidu and ors. Vs. Peddinti Demudamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-19-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP281
1. This second appeal arises out of a judgment and decree passed by District Judge, Vizag in A. S. No. 156/77 confirming an order of the District Munsif's Court, Chodavaram, passed in I. A. No. 102/76 in O. S. 93/70, in the court of the District Munsif, Chodavaram, the aforesaid I. A. No. 102/76 was filed by the present respondents under Order 26, Rule 30 of the Civil Procedure Code, praying that they might be brought on record as the legal representatives of the deceased-plaintiff in O. S. No. 93/70 D. M. C. Chodavaram, and a final decree might be passed against the present appellants who were the judgment debtors in the aforesaid suit. The present appellants opposed that I. A. 102/76. But both the courts below granted the relief to the present respondents. The defendants judgment-debtors filed this second appeal complaining against the orders of the District Judge. 2. O. S. No. 93/70 on the file of the District Munsif, Chodavaram, was filed by the sole plaintiff for partition and sep...
Arun Kumar Vs. the Special Secretary, Health, Housing and Municipal Ad ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-19-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP472
Ramachandra Rao, J.1. The question raised in this reference by the High Court officer is whether proper court--fee has been paid on the memorandum a of appeal filed under Clause (15) of the Letters Patent.2. The suit out of which this appeal arises was filed by the appellant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 5,400/-- and of for future compensation of Rs. 150/-- per month form the date of suit. The suit was valued at Rupees 5,400/-- and ad valorem court--fee of Rs. 453/-- was paid under Sch. 1, Art. 1 (c) read with Section 19 of the Andhra Pradesh Court--fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The suit was dismissed by the trial Court and the appellant filed an appeal C. C. C. A. No. 92/78 in this Court paying and ad valorem court-fee under Section 49 of the Act on the amount claimed in the suit. The appeal also having ended in dismissal, the appellant is seeking to file the above Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The Letters Patent A...
Pilla Narasimhaswamy Patrudu and ors. Vs. Bank of Baroda
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP240
ORDER1. The point that falls for determination in this revision is, whether a document which requires to be stamped under S. 35 of the Stamp Act but not stamped, and is marked in evidence, could be refused to be acted upon by the court in view of S. 36 of the Stamp Act.2. The relevant facts in brief which led to this revision are: The respondent-Bank filed a suit against the defendants, petitioners herein, for the recovery of a debt due under an equitable mortgage. During the course of trial when D. W. 1 who is the 1st defendant, was under examination, a document said to be an agreement of partition was got produced through him and the same was marked as Ex. B-2. Thereafter, it was objected to by the learned counsel for the plaintiff on the ground that the document required registration and that, unless stamp duty and penalty was paid, the document is not admissible in evidence. Before commencing cross-examination, the learned counsel again raised the objection to the marking of Ex. B-...
Kanigalla Prakasa Rao Vs. Nanduri Ramakrishna Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP272
P. Ramachandra Raju, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising on he following material facts. The plaintiff advanced a sum of Rs. 25,000 to defendants 1 and 2, partners of a rice mill, under Ex. A-1 pronote dated 30-4-1970, stipulating for the payment of interest at 24% per annum with annual rests. The 1st defendant is the father-in-law of the 2nd defendant. The rice mill was constructed to a vacant site of about 3,354 sq. yards. An extend of 2,292 sq. yards originally belonged to one Digavalli Venkataratgam husband of the 3rd defendant. Defendants 1 & 2 took on lease this vacant at from the said Venkataratnam for constructing the rice mill, but in doing so, have constructed the rice mill partly on that site and in an extent of 1962 sq. yards belonging to one K. Chiranjivi Rao. The 1st defendant later acquired title to the site of 1062 sq. yards under the registered sale deed Ex. A-2j dated 2-5-1951; subsequently both defendants 1 and 2 acquired title to the site of 2292 sq. yards fro...
A. Gyaneshwar Rao Vs. Mahmood Shareef and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP155
ORDER1. This revision is filed against an order allowing I. A. No. 400 of 1980 filed by the 1st respondent herein against the 2nd respondent herein and her children for specific performance of an agreement of sale.2. The relevant facts, in brief, are: The petitioner herein filed O. S. No. 3365 of 1979 against the 2nd respondent and her children for specific performance of an agreement of sale in respect of land comprised in S. Nos. 1 and 124 situated at Mir Sagar, Hyderabad District and for execution of a registered sale deed in pursuance thereof. The defendant, Ameer Bi, took a plea in the written statement that the pattedar of the suit land is Mahamood Sharif (1st respondent herein). But the plaintiff did not choose to make him a party to the suit. Prior to the filing of the suit, succession proceedings were initiated and they ended in favour of Mahmood Sharif (1st respondent herein) and against the defendant (Ameer Bi) on the death of the late Maqdoom Sharif, the father of the 1st r...
Venkateswara Stainless Steel and Wire Industries Vs. Government of Ind ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-1981
Reported in: 1983(14)ELT2217(AP)
1. This petition is filed for issue of a Writ of Certiorari or any other order or direction in the nature of such a Writ calling for the records from the first respondent pertaining to order No. 822B/77 of 1977 on its file and quashing the order dated 22-12-1977 passed therein. 2. The petitioner is a Small Scale Industrial Unit registered with the Director of Industries, Government of Andhra Pradesh under Registration No. 88/SSI/INDOM/F/61 dated 24-4-1967. The Industrial Unit is owned by registered firm known as Keshavji Ravji & Co., Madras, its principal business being that of Imports and Exports. The Head Office of the firm is at Madras. It has a Branch at Bombay and a factory at Hyderabad. The Petitioner manufactures automobile ancillaries as well as stainless steel hospitalware, stainless steel utensils, surgical instruments, etc. For the purpose of manufacturing its products, the petitioner requires stainless steel sheets, strips and circles as also imported Heat Resistance Steel ...
Potluri Subbareddi, P. Seshagirirao and Co. and ors. Vs. Kalabai Rathi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP186
1. This second appeal was filed by the first defendant and the legal representatives of the second defendant. The first defendant was sued in the trade name of M/s. Polutri Subba Reddy, P. Seshagiri Rao and Company being represented by partner Polutri Subha Reddy. The second defendant was sued in his individual name. the suit was for ejectment, for mesne profits and for damages for use and occupation.2. The second defendant had taken the suit premises belonging to the plaintiff on lease for a fixed period of one year ending with the 'Diwali day'. the plaintiff's complaint was that after the expiry of that period of one year the defendants were continuing in occupation of the premises paying rents to the landlord without vacating the suit premises. The plaintiff, therefore, issued quit notice on 4-2-1974 terminating the tenancy by the last day of February, 1974 and filed the present suit for ejectment, for mesne profits and for damages.3. The suit was resisted by the defendants on multi...
Andhra Pradesh Kuruma Sangham Society Vs. Mirza Ayanutullah Baig
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP138
1. The suit was filed by A. P. Kuruma Sangham represented by its General Secretary Sri Agiri Gopalarao against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs. 3,300/- representing the arrears of rent and for possession of the suit premises. That suit was contested by the defendant-tenant. One of the contentions raised by the defendant was to deny that the plaintiff was a registered Society. The defendant also contested the legal authority of Sri Agiri Gopalarao to sue. On that the trial court raised the following issues:-1. Whether the plaintiff is a registered society ? 2. Whether A. Gopalarao is entitled to file the suit 2. On the first issue the plaintiff produced the certificate of registration which the trial Court accepting held that the Society was a registered Society. But the trial court misunderstood the second issue as an independent issue. Accordingly it independently examined the evidence and found that the General Secretary. A Gopalarao was empowered to manage and supervise th...
Jay Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-05-1981
Reported in: 1982(10)ELT378(AP)
Rama Rao, J. 1. The Writ Appeal is at the instance of the petitioner in the Writ Petition seeking to quash the order No. 1586/73 dated 21-11-1973 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance confirming the orders of the Controller of Central Excise and Superintendent of Central Excise. The Writ petition is concerned with the validity of levy of excise duty on freight charges, cost of packing material and regulator for the fan and also deduction of permissible discount to determine the assessable balance for determination of excise duty. The petitioner claimed that the freight charges should not form part of assessable value for the purpose of excise duty. The Collector negatived this claim on the ground that the equalised freight is an element of cost and as such no abatement can be given under section 4 of the Central Excises Act. This order was confirmed in the appeal as well as in the Revision by the Government. The learned signal judge held that as the procedure of equalised fre...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »