Andhra Pradesh Court August 1985 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.
Challapalli Sugars Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-28-1985
Reported in: 1988LC353(AP); 1988(35)ELT626(AP)
1. The common question in the two appeals is relevant to a notification issued by the Central Government on October 12, 1974 in exercise of the power under sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The subject of the notification relates to free sale sugar and what is termed as levy sugar. The sugar in the two spheres of the market are accorded exemptions with reference to production of sugar in factories relevant to crushing season of December 1974 to September 1975. The words in serial No. 2 of the notification were the subject of interpretation by various Courts. The clause in serial No. 2 was interpreted by Karnataka High Court in India Sugars & Refineries Ltd. v. Union of India- 1983 (12) ELT 209, Madras High Court in Sakthi sugars Ltd. v. Union of India - 1983 (12) ELT 484, Delhi High Court in Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. v. Union of India-1984 (18) ELT 225, Bombay High Court in another journal in Pravara Shakari Shakar Karkhana LTd. v. Union of India -1984 ECR ...
V.B. Sivalingam Chettiar, Managing Director Abirami Cotton Mills Ltd. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-25-1985
Reported in: (1986)IILLJ104AP
ORDER1. These two petitions are filed under S. 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to quash S.T.C. Nos. 3365 and 3366 of 1984 (Summary Trial Cases) on the file of the Special Munsif Magistrate, Vijayawada. 2. The Labour Officer, Nellore, the respondent herein filed two complaints against the petitioner Sri V. B. Sivalingam Chettiar, Managing Director, Abirami Cotton Mills Limited, Sullurpet for offences punishable under Ss. 28 and 26 read with rule 4(c) and S. 27(2) of the Payment of Bonus Act. The charge was that for the accounting years 1980-81 and 1981-82 the petitioners failed to maintain a register in Form 'C' and produce the same on demand by the Inspector. In S.T.C. No. 3366/84 the charge was that the petitioner failed to maintain registers in Forms 'A' and 'B' for the accounting years 1980-81 and 1981-82 and produce the same on demand by the Inspector, as required under the provisions of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. 3. Section 26 of the Payment of Bonus Act deals with maintenance...
Liquor Enterprises Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer, Circle Iii, Hyderab ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-21-1985
Reported in: [1986]62STC88(AP)
Chennakesav Reddi, C.J.1. Much ado is made again in these cases about the just and reasonable interpretation of the expression 'during the year', employed in sub-section (1) of section 15 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). A Division Bench of this Court in Ramu & Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1970] 43 STC 510 construing the scope of section 15(1) of the Act held that there was nothing in the language of section 15, which prohibits the assessing authority from making a provisional assessment on the monthly returns submitted in form A-2 as required under rule 17 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') beyond the assessment year. It was further held that the expression 'during the year' in section 15(1) is not to be understood is 'within the year' and if the legislature intended to injunct the assessing authority to complete the provisional assessment within the year, they would have used the...
Gulam Mohammed Vs. Labour Court, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1985
Reported in: (1986)ILLJ297AP
ORDER1. This petition seeks writ in the nature of direction to the 2nd respondent to pay back wages in full and the attendant benefits to the petitioner after quashing the award, dated 26th July, 1978 passed by the Labour Court, Hyderabad. The circumstances under which this writ petition came to be filed may be noticed : 2. The petitioner was working as a Conductor in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation. While so, a charge sheet was served on 23rd December, 1971 framing three charges. Due enquiry was conducted and later he was removed from service. It was then contest by the petitioner on reference to the Labour Court wherein the question posed was whether the management of the Corporation is justified in terminating the service of the petitioner. The Labour Court on the detailed evidence and also the material on record, eventually held that the removal order was bad and therefore directed the Corporation to reinstate the petitioner in service however, without back wage...
Kothuri Venkata Subba Rao and ors. Vs. District Registrar of Assurance ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-1985
Reported in: AIR1986AP42
Punnayya, J.1. The question referred to us by the Commissioner of Survey Settlements and Land Records, Andhra Pradesh, under S. 57. Stamp Act, is whether the document styled as release deed by the petitioners is a sale deed for consideration or whether it is a release deed. 2. Six petitioners, viz, (1) Kothuri Venkata Subba Rao, (2) Kothuri Sambasiva Rao, (3) Kothuri Srinivasa Rao alias Venkateswaralu, (4) Kothuri Bhaskara Rao, (5) Kothuri Vijaya Bhaskara Rao and (6) Ramesh Babu being minor represented by guardian and mother Kothuri Vijaya Laxmi and four others, viz., (1) Kothuri Ramulu, (2) Penugonda Lakshmi Bapamma, (3) Murikipudi Venkataranganadham and (4) Kothuri Laxmaiah purchased jointly two plots of lands under two registered sale deeds dt. 7-11-1968 for Rs. 70,000/- and dt. 29-8-1973 for Rs. 20,000/- for constructing a Cinema Theatre. They were in enjoyment of the properties jointly as co-owners and no partnership was entered into. Later the four persons did not want to continu...
Vijayanagaram Narasimha Rao and ors. Vs. Ghanashyam Das Tapadia and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: [1986]60CompCas697(AP)
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. The appellants are the unsuccessful claimants. One Mr. Rama Rao, the husband of the fifth appellant and father of appellates Nos. 1 to 4, died in an accident which occurred on December 16, 1979, at about 4.00 p.m. near municipal stadium on Kasthuribapet Road in Vijayawada town in which car ADX 3999 driven by a mechanic, the second respondent, was involved. The Tribunal below found that the occurrence has taken place as a result of rash and negligent driving by the mechanic, the second respondent. It found that the first respondent-owner entrusted the car for repairs to the second respondent; the accident occurred while the car was taken out for testing after repairs were effected and it is not during the course of the employment of the second respondent by the first respondent. Therefore, neither the owner nor the insurance company is liable to pay compensation. So, a sum of Rs. 20,000 was awarded against the mechanic, the second respondent. The appeal is filed again...
Vijayanagaram Narsimha Rao and ors. Vs. Ghanshyam Das Tapadia and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1985
Reported in: I(1987)ACC250
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. The appellants are the unsuccessful claimants. One Mr. Rama Rao, the husband of the fifth appellant and father of appellants 1 to 4 died in an accident occurred on 16-12-1979 at about 4.00 p.m. near Municipal Stadium on Kasthuribapet Road in Vijayawada town in which the car ADX 3999 driven by the Meshanic, the second respondent was involved. The Tribunal below found that the occurrence has taken place as a result of rash and negligent driving of the Mechanic, the second respondent. It found that the first respondent-owner entrusted the car for repairs to the second respondent; and accident occurred while the car was taken out for testing after repairs were effected and it is not during the course of the employment of the 2nd respondent by the first respondent. Therefore, neither the owner nor the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation. So, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was awarded against the mechanic second respondent. The appeal is filed against the quantum as wel...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Warner Hindustan Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-1985
Reported in: [1987]165ITR692(AP)
Upendra Lal Waghray, J. 1. After hearing counsel for the parties on June 14, 1985, on this application by the Revenue, we had come to a conclusion that this is a fit case on which a certificate shall issue under section 261 of the Income-tax Act for appeal to the Supreme Court of India. However, the submissions of counsel for the Revenue raised a doubt whether a certificate could be issued confining it to some of the questions only in the case. The matter was posted for being mentioned on July 5, 1985, and July 12, 1985. 2. We have heard counsel for the parties further on the question whether the certificate to be issued can be restricted to some questions only or it will relate to the judgment in the case referred 3. Nineteen questions relating to the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72 were referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of the High Court, questions Nos. 1 to 7 at the instance of the Revenue and questions Nos. 8 to 16 at the instance of the assessee. Four were answered in ...
Pentapati Chitti Mahalakshmi Vs. Gannavarapu Subba Rap and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-1985
Reported in: AIR1986AP52
P. Kodandaramayya, J. 1. A Division Bench of this court consisting of Gangadhara Rao and Jeevan Reddy, JJ referred L. P. A. 98/77 for a decision by a Full Bench formulating the following three question : 1. (a) Whether Section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 had overriding effect on succession taking place after 1956 and as such Section 12 of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Hereditary Village Offices Act, 1895 ceases to have any effect? (b) In a case where a daughter became entitled to the office and emoluments as defined in Section 3(4) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Hereditary Village Offices Act III of 1895, and the daughter died in 1958 after coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, is the succession still governed by Section 12 of the Andhra pradesh (Andra Area) hereditary Village Offices Act, or by the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act? 2. What is the impact of the Andra Inams Abolition Act, 1956 and the repeal of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Heredi...
In Re: Yerasuri Lakshminarayana Murthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1985
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1846
ORDERK. Amareswari, J.1. This is a petition under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to revise the order of the II Addl. Munsif Magistrate, Visakapatnam attaching the salary of the petitioner for not paying the maintenance according to the decree in M.C. No. 11 of 1983.1 do not find any illegality in the order. Mr. Sastry, learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that under Section 125(3) of the Cr. P.C. only movable property can be attached and sold but the salary is not movable property which can be sold and therefore the salary cannot be attached. 1 am unable to agree with this contention. Section 125 Cr. P.C. is designed to provide maintenance to a party who is unable to support herself or himself. Therefore, it is imperative on the part of the person against whom the decree is passed to comply with the decree. Section 125(3) Cr. P.C. provides for enforcement of the decree and the said section says that any movable property can be attached. The expression movable prop...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »