Skip to content

Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.

Jul 06 1984

Gram Panchayat, Kolanapalle Vs. the Collector, West Godavari, Eluru an ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Decided on: Jul-06-1984

Reported in: AIR1986AP240

P.A. Choudary, J. 1. This writ appeal is filed against a judgment of our learned brother Raghuvir, J., dismissing the writ petition filed by the Gram Panchayat of Kolanapalli, West Godavari District. The Kolanapalli Gram Panchayat comprises certain areas of which Komatigunta, is the Panchayat Raj Commissioner for his area. By his notification dated 13-4-78, he had carved out certain areas from Kolanapelli Gram Panchayat and constituted those areas into a separate gram panchayat. The Kolanapalli Gram Panchayat is not agreeable to this bifurcation of these areas from its jurisdiction. It has therefore filed the aforesaid writ petition assailing the correctness of the Collector's action. The learned single Judge has dismissed that writ petition against which the present writ appeal has been filed.2. The District Collector, West Godavari exercised the powers of the Commissioner of the Panchayat Raj under S. 3 of the A. P. Gram Panchayat Act. Exercising the powers under S. 3, Cl. (2) of the...


Jul 05 1984

Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation Limited Vs. Commissioner of ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Decided on: Jul-05-1984

Reported in: (1985)44CTR(AP)1; [1984]150ITR533(AP)

Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The question referred for opinion under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, is : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the surplus realised on the sale of securities partook the character of trading profits ?' 2. The assessee is the Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation Limited, Hyderabad, incorporated under s. 3 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. According to s. 25 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, one of its objects is : '(g) Granting loans or advances to or subscribing to debentures of an industrial concern repayable within a period not exceeding 20 years from the date on which they are granted or subscribed to, as the case may be.' 3. The assessee held certain securities in the form of Andhra Pradesh State Development Loan in 1970 and 1980. These securities were purchased by the assessee for a sum of Rs. 30,51,784 in the year 1969. During the accounting year relevant...


Jul 05 1984

Management, Royal Laboratories, Hyderabad Vs. Labour Court and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Decided on: Jul-05-1984

Reported in: (1985)ILLJ201AP

P.A. Choudary, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the writ petitioner against a judgment of our learned brother Jeevan Reddy, J. The writ petition is filed by the Management, Royal Laboratories, against an award of the Labour Court, Hyderabad, made in I.D. No. 3 of 1974. 2. The Royal Laboratories is a pharmaceutical firm manufacturing drugs. One Srihari Sahay, the contesting respondent to the above writ petition, was one of its employees. The said Sahay was engaged by the said Royal Laboratories to work as Optical Testor and Supervisor. On the basis of certain allegations of misconduct of violence and disorderly behaviour, viz., habitual neglect of work and wiful damage to the property of the management, charges were laid against the said Sahay by the Management on 7th August, 1972. On the denial of those charges by the employee, the Management conducted a domestic inquiry in which it was found that the charges were proved against the employee. On that basis, the service of the employee w...


Jul 05 1984

S. Santhosh Kumar Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Decided on: Jul-05-1984

Reported in: AIR1985AP228

1. These writ petitions are for issue of a writ declaring that R.1 (3) of the Rules made under G.O. Ms. No. 740 M & H dated 22-11-1983 reserving all the seats in Super Specialities in medical faculty in favour of in-service candidates as unconstitutional illegal and ultra vires and direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners without reference to the said rule and further direct the respondent to make selection for D.M. Cardiology for two seats.2. The averments in the affidavits in support of the writ petitions may be epitomised. The petitioners having taken M.D. and M.S. Degrees are interested in pursuing further studies in Super Specialities of Medical faculty. The petitioners have brilliant academic career and they did not opt to join in Government service with a view to pursue higher education. In the State of Andhra Pradesh Super Specialities were introduced in the year 1979. There are in all 14 seats allocated for Super Specialities in different subjects. The nu...


Jul 04 1984

Kadim Kusuma and ors. Vs. Kadiam Appachiamma and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Decided on: Jul-04-1984

Reported in: (1985)ILLJ194AP

1. The plaintiffs are the appellants in this appeal. The suit is laid for a declaration that the plaintiffs along with the 1st defendant are entitled to a share in the provident fund amount of late Srinivasa Rao, the husband of the 1st plaintiff and father of plaintiffs 2 to 4, in five equal shares and for the consequential relief to direct the 2nd respondent to pay the 4/5th share of the plaintiffs towards the provident fund amount and for costs. The 1st defendant is the mother of late Srinivasa Rao. Late Srinivasa Rao was an employee under Railway Authorities the 2nd defendant and even before his marriage he joined the service and at that time he nominated the 1st defendant his mother as the person to receive the provident fund in the event of his death. After the marriage he did not change the nomination and allowed to continue the original nomination unaltered. He died on 25th March, 1980. When the 1st defendant wanted to withdraw the amount on the strength of the nomination the pr...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial