Andhra Pradesh Court November 1985 Judgments
Sreenivasa Distilleries Vs. S.R. Thyagarajan and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-1985
Reported in: AIR1986AP328
ORDER1. The defendant is the revision petitioner. The plaintiff filed a suit for granting permanent injunction restraining the defendant from letting out noxious fluids into the river, Neev Pending the suit, the plaintiffs sought a temporary injunction against the defendant. An objection was raised that the suit itself is not maintainable in view of the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. This objection was upheld by the trial Court. On appeal, the appellate Court had disagreed with the conclusion of the trial Court and held that the suit and the application are maintainable and the Court has got jurisdiction to examine the application for injunction and consequently remanded the matter for inquiry. Against that order, the present revision is filed.2. I think the interpretation placed by the appellate Court is correct. The objection as to the maintainability of the suit is based upon the provisions of S. 58 of the above Act which reads as under :'58...
Tag this Judgment!N.V. Ramaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-1985
Reported in: 1988(35)ELT38(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. The Hyderabad Denatured Spirit Rules, 1955 and the Andhra Pradesh Denatured Spirit Rules, 1971, which repealed the Hyderabad Rules, levied gallonage fee at the rate of Re. 1/- per gallon on the denatured spirit purchased by licensees from the Government Distilleries. Denatured spirit is used as a raw material in the manufacture of several products. A person, M/s. Syntho-Pharm, represented by its partner Sri. A. P. Waghray, challenged the said levy on the ground, inter alia, that the State was not rendering any services whatsoever in lieu of the said fee and, therefore, the levy was bad. The writ petition filed by him was allowed by a Benc of this Court, which declared the levy to be bad inasmuch as the state failed to produce any material whatsoever to show that it was rendering some or other service in lieu of the said fee. The declaration granted by the Court is to the following effect :' We are, therefore, constrained to hold that the imposition of the Gallonage ...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Moose Quadri Vs. Special Officer, Municipal Corporation of Hydera ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-1985
Reported in: AIR1987AP6
ORDER1. Questions of constitutional importance viz., whether the petitioner is denied of right to an avocation and was meted out inequiteous treatment inihibiting at the threshold of pre-qualification stage to enter into favourable relations with the first respondent along with other respondents in offering tenders to construct commercial complexes, etc. claim square answers in this cause.2. Before elaboration thereof, it is necessary to state in brief, the material legislative setting and factual base. S. 129-A(1) of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 (Act II of 1956) for short, 'the Act', mandates the Commissioner in respect of any work the cost of which is Rs. 50 lakhs or more, to give a 'notice by advertisement in the newspapers in the prescribed manner, inviting tenders or applications from persons who satisfy the pre-qualifications specified in such notice. Sub-section (4) thereof empowered the Government to make rules pursuant to which the Municipal Corporation of Hy...
Tag this Judgment!J. Goutham Rao and ors. Vs. Union Bank of India and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-1985
Reported in: [1988]64CompCas674(AP)
C. Sree Ramulu, J.1. In this revision petition, the only question that arises for consideration is whether the lower court, viz., the court of the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, has jurisdiction to try the case O.S. No. 101 of 1983 on its file and whether the impugned order dated April 7, 1983, holding that the court had jurisdiction to try the suit is sustainable in law. 2. The material facts which facts which are not in dispute are at that the first defendant is a limited company constituted under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, for carrying on the business of manufacture, buying, selling ,etc., of pesticides, insecticides etc., based at Karimnagar. Defendants Nos. 2 to 6 are the promoters of the said company residing at Karimnagar. The company acquired land and machinery, etc., at Karimnagar for carrying on the business. Defendants Nos.2 to 6 approached the plaintiff-Union Bank of India, branch at Karimnagar, for granting loan facilities to th...
Tag this Judgment!Dara Ramanarasimham Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-1985
Reported in: AIR1986AP339
ORDER1. The petitioner is seeking a Mandamus to direct the first respondent to execute the agreement with the petitioner in terms of G. O. Ms. No. 587 dt, June 22, 1976 and to supply soft wood at the rate fixed, viz., Rs. 250/- per cmt, prescribed in the said G. O. Though there is no relief sought for against the second and fourth respondents, viz, The Chief Conservator of Forests and the Andhra Pradesh Forest Development Corporation Limited in this regard, the petitioner is permitted to amend the prayer to incorporate the same and it is accordingly amended, seeking relief against the 2nd and 4th respondents also.2. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner approached the Government for supply for soft wood pieces for the purpose of manufacturing splints and veneers. The petitioner is a small scale unit. The Government, in G. O. Ms. No. 587 dt. June 22, 1976 directed the Chief Conservator of Forests (2nd respondent) to enter into an agreement with the petitioner after the agreement ...
Tag this Judgment!Medarametla Seshareddy and ors. Vs. Korrapati Gopala Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-1985
Reported in: AIR1987AP1
Kodandaramayya, J.1. This Second Appeal is referred to a Bench by our learned brother Raghuvir, J., as it involves competing claims of easement of irrigating the agricultural lands between two villages.2. The defendants are appellants in this appeal. The respondents-plaintiffs filed the suit in a representative capacity for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from causing obstruction to the plaintiffs in exercising their rights to take water from Pilli Vagu shown in the plaint plan to their lands comprised in various survey numbers by means of paccotah or oil engine.3. The averments in the plaint may be stated thus:- The plaintiffs are the owners of survey numbers mentioned in the plaint and those lands abut the natural stream called Pilli vagu which flows in the limits of Bitragunta, coming from westwards and flowing eastwards and northwards and the plaintiffs are the riparian owners and are taking water to irrigate their lands as a supplemental source to t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›