Andhra Pradesh Court December 1981 Judgments
Kesoram Cements, Basantnagar Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-1981
Reported in: 1982(10)ELT214(AP)
Ramanujulu Naidu, J. 1. In this Writ Petition the legality of levy of exercise duty in a sum of Rs. 22,55,795.76 on the cost of jute bags in which excisable commodity of cement manufactured by the petitioner-company, hereinafter referred to as the Company, was packed and sold between 1-10-1975 and 8-1-1976 is questioned and refund of the amount of excise duty paid by the Company under protest prior to or at the time of the removal of the commodity is prayed for. 2. In W.P. No. 1532 of 1976 filed by the K.C.P. Limited, engaged in manufacture of cement at Macherla, Guntur District, an identical question was raised and answered in favour of the assessee therein by a Division Bench of this Court consisting or one of us and Sri Kondaiah, the former Chief Justice. The said Writ Petition was disposed of along with a batch of Writ Petitions filed by some other assessees in which the scope of Section 4 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 as amended by the Central Excise and Salt (Amendment...
Tag this Judgment!P. Lakshmipathi and ors. Vs. Co-ordinator, Common Admissions Committee ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP424
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. An issue of considerable importance relating to the procedure to be followed in making admissions to the Engineering Course in Osmania Andhra, Kakatiya and J. N. T. Universities is involved in these appeals. The specific question is: how to apply and operate the rule of reservation in favour of backward classes and others, in the matter of admission to B.E./B.Tech Courses in the Engineering Colleges? Until the current academic year, admissions were made by the individual Universities by themselves. It was found that such a practice was creating several complications, resulting in long delay in finalising the admissions, due to variation in the dates of admission, and duplication of admission in case of some students.. To avoid such delays, it was decided to have a common Entrance and a common Admission Committee for all the Universities in the State, except Sree Venkateswara University. The total number of seats available in the Osmania, Andhra, Kakatiya and J. N. T....
Tag this Judgment!Sayed Jeelam Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, H ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP220
Kuppusawmi, C.J.1. The appellant in this writ appeal is the petitioner in writ Petition No.6676/80. He applied for the grant of two temporary permits on the route Nellore to Donakonda. By order dated 29.09.80, the application was rejected by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Nellore and ground that the route partially overlaps a notified route and hence S.68-FF of the Motor Vehicles Act (referred to in the judgment as the Act) operates as bar. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. Before the Tribunal it was contended that in view of the promulgation of a draft scheme on those routes, a temporary permit under Sec. 68F (1-C) of the Act could be granted though there may be a draft scheme in respect of the routes overlapping the route in question. In support of this contention, he relied upon a decision of this Court in W.R. No. 4475/79 to the effect that when a route is covered by a draft scheme as well as an ...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Hyderabad Vs. N. As ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-30-1981
Reported in: 1984(16)ELT202(AP)
1. This appeal by the Central Government is preferred against the judgment of acquittal of the accused of the offence punishable under Section 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') by the Special Judge for Economic Offences in C.C. No. 1 of 1980. 2. The case for the prosecution is : On 13-3-1974 the Superintendent of Central Excise and Customs accompanied by his Inspectors searched the house No. 5-8-505/A/2 at Chirag Ali Lane, Hyderabad, belonging to accused 1 and 2 in the presence of mediators. The first accused is the son of the second accused. In the course of the search 56 bottles of liquor in the living room of the ground floor which was in the exclusive occupation of the first accused and 12 bottles of liquor in the dicky of the car bearing registration No. APG 4334 belonging to the second accused were found secreted. Entertaining a reasonable belief that the said bottles (M.Os. 1 to 68) are liquor of foreign origin and smuggled and, therefore,...
Tag this Judgment!Jayalakshmi Talkies Vs. the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Chirala
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP174
Alladi Kuppuswami, C.J. 1. All these writ petitions have been heard together as a common question regarding the interpretation of the explanation to S. 4-A of the Andhra Pradesh Entertainment Tax Act (referred to in this judgment as the Act) is involved in these cases. It is sufficient to refer to the facts in W. P. No. 9668/81 in order to appreciate the contentions put forward.2. The petitioner is the proprietor of Jayalakshmi Talkies, Under S. 4 of the Act, it is provided that on each payment for admission to any entertainment, there shall be levied and paid to the State Government , a tax referred to as the entertainments tax calculated at certain rates. S. 4-A provides that in addition to the tax under S. 4, there shall be levied and paid to the State Government a tax calculated at Rs. 6/- for every show in case of entertainments held within the jurisdiction of any local authority whose population is 50,000 or above and Rs. 4/- for every show where entertainments are held within th...
Tag this Judgment!Mogilipuvvu Annapurnaiah Vs. Malampati Narasimha Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP253
Raghuvir, J.1. M. Annapurnayya, the appellant in the case laid the suit on September 10, 1974 for a permanent injunction against M. Narasimha Rao and G. Koteswara Rao (the lessors) directing them not to interfere with his possession of a building and a vacant site appurtenant thereto. He alleged he is a tenant in the building, that it was let out to him in 1961 by the two lessors for business purposes. The period in the written lease expired in June, 1973 and the lessors extended the lease for three more years, orally up to 1976 on payment of Rs. 2,500. The lessors denied the oral extension of lease. Their case was, the lease was terminated by notice, Ex. A1 dated July 17, 1974, thereafter, the tenant surrendered possession to them. Thus, the tenant was not in possession of the suit premises, therefore, no injunction can be granted against them.2. The District Munsif, Narasaraopet on November 17, 1977 found the tenant did not surrender possession. The oral lease set up by the tenant up...
Tag this Judgment!R. Ramanujam Vs. D. Venkat Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP227
Punnayya, J.1. Civil Revision Petition No. 1324 of 1981 is directed against the judgment passed by the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, in R. A. No. 1 of 1976.2. One K. Rajayya was the original tenant, who took the premises bearing Nos. 3-4-154 and 3-4-155. Tobacco Bazar, Secunderabad, on a monthly rent of Rupees 100 from the landlord. Rajayya died on 29-1-1971, Rajayya's concubine Seethamma, who has living with Rajayya, at the time of his death, requested the landlord to allow her to continue in the premises in question after the death of Rajayya on the same rent of Rs.100 per month from 1-2-1971 till she gets an alternative accommodation. The landlord agreed to take Seethamma as his tenant and permitted her to be in the occupation of the suit premises on the same rent of Rs.100 per month from 1-2-71. As she failed to pay the rents from 1-2-1971 terminating the tenancy of Seethamma and asked her to vacate the premises by January, 1973 and demanded her to pay rupees 2,2...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Ramakaran Vs. B. Ramulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP256
ORDER1. The petitioner is the plaintiff. The plaintiff field the suit being O.S No. 1351/81 for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant and his agents from interfering with his peaceful possession of the land measuring 5,000 sq. yds in S. No. 129/56 (T.S. No. 19). Shaikpet village, Banjara Hills, Road No. 14, Hyderabad. In the interlocutory application the trial Court granted ex parte interim injunction order on 27-11-1981 and posted the same to 20-1-1982. The defendant moved an application the hearing of I.A. No. 1261/81 for advancing the hearing of I.A. No. 1261/81 and thereupon the hearing of the petition was advanced to 4-12-1981, On 4-12-1981 it was adjourned to 8-12-1981. Meanwhile on 4-12-1981 the defendant field an appeal as against the exparte interim injunction order dt. 27-11-1981. Pending the appeal being C.M.A. No. 359/81 in the court of the Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, he also moved an interlocutory application being I.A. No. 1199/81 for suspensi...
Tag this Judgment!State of Andhra Pradesh and anr. Vs. Bandalam Srinivasulu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP291
ORDER1. These conjoint revision petitions are against the orders declining to decide preliminary issue under O. 14, to decide preliminary issue under O. 14, R. 2, C. P. C. The petitioners are defendants 1 and 2. The plaintiffs filled suits challenging the legality and validity of the order dt. 20-6-1978 in R. C. 4407/77 and similar ordered passed under S. 6(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Occupants of Homesteads (Conferment of Ownership) Act of 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') . The defendants 1 and 2, petitioners herein, field applications for deciding the preliminary issue as to jurisdiction of the court to entertain the suit in view of the express bar of suit in the civil court contained in the Act. These applications are resisted by the respondents-plaintiffs on the ground that the petitioners have not filed written statements in the suit and orders passed under S. 6 (1) of the Act are actuated by mala fides and vitiated by various illegalities and arbitrariness and violation o...
Tag this Judgment!Vishnu Prasad Bhatt Vs. K. Narayan Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1982AP375
ORDER1. This revision petition is by a tenant under the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act. While the building was in the ownership of the previous owner and possession of some six tenants including the revision petitioner, the present twenty-four respondents who were the eviction petitioners purchased it under twenty-four separate sale-deeds. By the date of purchase there were six tenants in the suit premises. After purchase, two of the tenants voluntarily relinquished their possession. From the remaining tenants the landlords demanded vacant possession of the building, but the tenants refused to vacate. There were suit notices and reply notices, but they were to no purpose. The landlords, seeking eviction of the remaining four tenants, filed before the Rent Controller, four separate eviction petitions. Originally the first five respondents to this revision petition alone filed those eviction petitions. On the objection of the tenants that five owners cann...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »