Andhra Pradesh Court April 1984 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.
State of Andhra Pradesh and ors. Vs. P. Ram Shah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1986AP258
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. O. S. No. 1 of 1969 on the file of the Chief Judge's Court, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, at Secunderabad was instituted, in forma pauperis, by Smt. Nasreen Banu and others for declaration of their title and possession of 503 Acres 36 Guntas of land comprised in Mallepalli locality, Hyderabad City or, in the alternative, for compensation in a sum of Rs. 85,35,660/-. Defendants 1 and 2 to the suit were (1) Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government, Hyderabad, and (ii) Collector, Hyderabad. At that time, Sri. M. S. Rajalingam (respondent in CCCA No. 181/83 and plaintiff in O. S. No. 1071/82) was working as the Government Pleader in that Court. He filed the appearance on behalf of defendants 1 and 2 in the suit, and filed written statement on their behalf. He was appearing in the suit up to the stage when issues were framed. Thereafter, he ceased to be the Government Pleader. In his place, Sri. B. S. Palnitkar was appointed as the...
M. John Kotaiah Vs. A. Divakar and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1985AP30
ORDER1. The main question involved in this revision is as to whether the power of attorney executed by the 2nd defendant in favour of the petitioner-plaintiff on 8-1-1977 prima facie satisfies the legal requirements for being construed as an irrevocable power of attorney. 2. This is a revision preferred by the plaintiff in O.S.No.2380/82 on the file of the 3rd Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The suit was filed for the grant of a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and management of the plaint schedule properties and from demolishing item 1 of the plaint schedule. The schedule to the plain consists of two items. Item No.1 is a doubt storied building bearing No.5-9-195 Chiragalli Lane, Hyderabad while the second items is a vacant site admeasuring 1393 square yards bearing No.5-9-88/1 and 2 at Fateh Maidan, Chapel Road,. Hyderabad. Pending suit the petitioner prayed for the issue of a temporary injunction restraini...
Cheekati Parasuram Naidu Vs. Mariserla Venkatarami Naidu and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-1984
Reported in: AIR1985AP169
ORDER1. This is an Election Petition presented under 80 of the Representation of People Act, 43 of 1951 (hereinafter called the Act). In this petition the election of the 1st respondent Mariserla Venkatarami Naidu as a Member of the A.P. Legislative Assembly from No. 9 Parvatipuram Assembly Constituency is challenged. The petitioner is one of the unsuccessful candidates in the said election. 2. The averment of the petition are as follows: - It is stated as per the Election programme to the said Assembly Constituency, the last date for filing nominations was 11-12-1982, the date of scrutiny was 13-12-82, the date for withdrawal of nominations was 15-12-82, the date for pool was fixed on 5-1-83 and the declaration of the results was fixed on 6-1-83. The petitioner, the 1st respondent, Sarvasri Yalla Sasibhushana Rao, Dwarapureddi Suryanarayana, Doddi Parasuram and Chamala Surayya and some others filed their nomination papers. The Returning officer i.e. the 2nd respondent herein rejected ...
Thakasi Satyanarayana, Sunkaranam Satya Prasad Vs. State of Andhra Pra ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: (1985)44CTR(AP)21; [1985]153ITR818(AP)
1. The above two criminal revision cases arise out of C.C. No. 24 of 1981 on the file of the court of special judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad. In all, eight charges were framed against the two accused therein. Charges 1 and 2 were framed against A-1 under ss. 276C(1)(ii) and 277(ii) of the I.T. Act. Charges 3 and 4 were framed against A-2 under s. 278(ii) of the I.T. Act for abetment of commission of the offences by A-1 and covered by charges 1 and 2. Charges 5 and 7 were framed against A-2 under ss. 193 and 196 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, while charges 6 and 8 were framed against A-1 for abetment of commission of the said offences by A-2. The first accused was convicted of the first charge by the learned Special Judge under s. 276C(1)(ii) of the I.T. Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000, in default to suffer R.I for six months. He was acquitted of all the other charges. The second accused was convicted ...
A. Manik Rao Vs. Director, Defence Mettalurgical Research Laboratory, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: (1985)ILLJ103AP
ORDER1. What are the limits to the power of the State to refuse to appoint a citizen to work for the State. That important question falls for consideration in this Writ Petition. 2. The petitioner had passed in November, 1970, his S.S.C. examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Education and his Intermediate Examination in March, 1973 conducted by the Board of Intermediate Education. Almost immediately thereafter, he joined in August 1973 the course of Turner in the Boys Town Industrial Training Centre, Hyderabad and completed it by coming out successful in the month of July, 1976 in the All India Trade Test conducted by the National Council for Training in Vocational Trades. In that All India Trade Test, the petitioner earned credit of being the best trainee of the Boys Town Industrial Training Institute. From the beginning the petitioner has been an earnest young man devoted to his studies. After passing the trade test the petitioner worked as Turner in some private industry f...
Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors. Vs. K. Sethuramman and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1984
Reported in: AIR1986AP170
Lakshmana Rao, J.1. In this Writ Appeal there is no dispute about facts. The only question that arises for consideration is whether a person or persons appointed by the Registrar to manage the affairs of the Society in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under S. 32(7)(A) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 7 of 1964, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', is a Committee within the meaning of S. 21-C. A Full Bench of this Court in Kamareddy Suryanarayana v. District Co-operative Officer, : AIR1976AP340 while interpreting the word 'Committee' in S. 21-C held as follows :--'..............They must have meant it to be both an elected committee and a nominated committee.'The learned Judges have considered the objects and reasons for enacting S. 21-C and ultimately came to the above said conclusion. It is so doubt true that while coming to the said conclusion the learned Judges were concerned with a committee nominated under the Second Proviso to S. 31 of the Act.2. In th...
S. Prakash Reedy and ors. Vs. Principal, Government Ayurvedic College, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1984
Reported in: AIR1985AP110
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed for the issue of a writ or order declaring the entrance examination conducted by the respondent, the Principal. Government Ayurvedic College. Hyderabad, for the purpose of admission to the M.D. (Ayurvedic) Course for the academic year 1983-84 as illegal and arbitrary and also declaring Rule 6() of the Rules of Admission to M.D. (Ayurvedic) Course as illegal and unconstitutional and to direct the respondents to re-conduct the entrance test in the interest of justice. In support of the said petition Sri. S. Prakash Reddy, has filed an affidavit wherein it is stated that the respondent. Principal, Government Ayurvedic College. Hyderabad called for applications for admission to the course M.D. (Ayurvedic) for the academic year 1983-84. The Rules for admission to the said course were issued by the respondent. The admissions were to be made on the basis of the marks obtained by the candidates in the entrance examination conducted by the respondent. The pet...
Alankar theatre Vs. Entertainment Tax Officer, Warangal
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-19-1984
Reported in: [1991]82STC417(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Taxes on cinema entertainment in the State of Andhra Pradesh are levied and governed by the Andhra Pradesh Entertainments Tax Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Act was made by the Madras Legislature in 1939, simultaneously repealing the Madras Local Authorities Entertainments Tax Act, 1926. The object of the Act is to levy taxes on amusements and other entertainments, and to provide for the payment of compensation of the local authorities. The preamble to Act, as it now stands, reads as follows :'An Act to impose taxes on entertainments in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Whereas it is expedient to provide for the levy by the State Government of taxes on amusements and other entertainments, to repeal the Madras Local Authorities Entertainments Tax Act, 1926 (Madras Act V of 1927) and to provide for the payment of compensation to local authorities now levying a tax under the Act aforesaid, it is hereby enacted as follows :-' The Act which was in forc...
The District Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Kukatpalli Bus Depot, Hyderabad Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-19-1984
Reported in: (1986)ILLJ250AP
ORDER1. These two writ petitions, one by the Management viz., W.P. No. 3371/79 (for short, the respondent) and another viz., W.P. No. 4105/80 filed by the employee (for short 'the petitioner') have been filed to quash the Award in I.D. No. 118/76 passed by the Labour Court, Hyderabad. 2. The facts, not in dispute, are that the petitioner was working as a Conductor in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation in its Depot at Kukatpalli. On 16th October, 1975 while the petitioner was conducting the bus APZ. 685, the Checking Inspector, at Stage No. 8 i.e., Punjagutta Police Station, made a surprise check and called upon the petitioner to produce Statistical Return and ticket tray. the petitioner refused to surrender them and thereby prevented the employer or other public servant in discharge of his official duties, constituting serious misconduct as per Regulation 9(1), Note 2(xiii) of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Employees (Classification, Control and Ap...
Bollam Venkataiah Vs. Venumuddala Venkata Ramana Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-1984
Reported in: AIR1985AP26
1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit was instituted for the recovery of Rs.9, 150/-. The trial Court decreed the suit and in appeal the decree was reversed and the suit was dismissed. Thus, the Second Appeal.2. The case of the appellant is that the respondent borrowed a sum of Rs.9, 150/- on Jan. 1, 1973 in the morning, and as a collateral security, he executed a promissory note in the evening and also passed on the receipt - Ex A1 - On the same date. In spite of the demand, the respondent did not pay the amount. Thus, he was constrained to lay the suit. In the written statement filed by the respondent, it is pleaded that the appellant is a professional money-lender and he is not possessed of the licence required under the Hyderabad Money-Lenders Act. He also pleaded that the promissory note is an integral part of the original cause of action and the suit is not based on the original cause of action. Since the promissory note is inadmissible in evidence, the suit is not maintain...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »