Andhra Pradesh Court November 1988 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.
Baratam Satyanarayana Vs. Baratam Kantharao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-1988
Reported in: AIR1989AP320
ORDERJagannadha Rao, J.1. This revision petition raises a question of interpretation of the provisions of Sections 2, 3, 6(2), 7(b) of the Partition Act read with Rule 9(1) of the Rules framed under that Act and the applicability or otherwise of Order 21, Rules 84 and 85 of the Code of Civil Procedure and of Rules 193 to 205 of the Civil Rules of Practice. The point is whether upon a sale among co-sharers of joint property under Section 3 of the Partition Act (hereinafter called the Act), failure to deposit the bid amount would automatically require the property to be resold by invoking Order 21, Rule 84, C.P.C. or whether the Court could extend time without reference to the provisions of Order 21, Rule 84, C.P.C.2. The facts of the case are as follows : - The petitioner in this revision is the 2nd defendant in the suit which was originally filed in the year 1974 and was subsequently numbered as O.S. No. 20/78 on the file of Sub Court, Srikakulam. After passing of the preliminary decre...
Mohd Shabeer Ali Vs. A.P. State Road Transport Corporation and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-24-1988
Reported in: I(1990)ACC560
Ramaswamy, J.1. The petitioner was a driver. On September 21,1984 at about 9-45 p.m., while he was driving the vehicle APZ 9444 on route No. 1 Secunderabad to Afzal Gunj, an accident had taken place at Musheerabad whereat the rider of the Luna bearing ABK 7450 came in opposite direction and he died at that accident. As a result the petitioner was prosecuted under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code and simultaneously proceedings were initiated under the A.P. S.R.T.C. Employees (Conduct) Regulations, stating is to be a misconduct. After giving show cause notice and giving opportunity, the order of removal dated April 9,1985 was passed by the disciplinary authority. Assailing the legality thereof, the writ petition has been filed.2. The finding of the authority is that the petitioner has driven the bus in a high speed and therefore the accident has taken place, as a result, removed him from service. The contention of Sri Govardhanachari, learned Counsel for the petitioner is that in th...
Union Bank of India Vs. Jogi Mohan Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-1988
Reported in: [1991]72CompCas325(AP)
M.N. Rao, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff-Union Bank of India, Vijayawada, from the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada, in O.S. No. 236 of 1979, raises the question as to the applicability of the proviso to section 3 of the Usurious Loans Act, 1918, as amended by Act VIII of 1937. 2. The parties in this appeal are referred to in their original character as they appeared in the court below. The first defendant borrowed a sum of Rs. 1,12,356 from the plaintiff-bank for doing abkari business. Defendants Nos. 2 to 4 are the guarantors. The second defendant, it was alleged, mortgaged the plaint schedule properties which comprise two houses, and the first defendant executed a promissory note, exhibit A-3, dated September 29, 1976, in respect of the amount borrowed. The contractual rate of interest is 15% with quarterly rests. 3. The second defendant filed a written statement specifically contending that the interest charged with quarterly rests was usurious an...
Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. Revenue Divisional Officer and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-1988
Reported in: [1990]182ITR456(AP)
K. Ramaswamy, J. 1. The petitioner a Government of India undertaking is questioning her jurisdiction of the respondents to levy and collect the non-agricultural land assessment tax under the Andhra Pradesh Non-Agricultural Lands Assessment Tax Act, 1963 (Act 14 of 1963) (for short 'the Act'). 2. The facts not in dispute are that the State Government, acting through its Secretary, Industries Department, at its meeting held on June 26, 1969, authorised the establishment of the petitioner industry and allotted 500 acres of land for project purpose which included 330 acres of land. The petitioner was put in possession. The Government agreed to make available the land free of cost originally. But, thereafter, they asked the petitioner to make good Rs. 10 lakhs incurred towards additional cost. Accordingly, the petitioner has been in possession of 330 acres of land. This land is still registered in the revenue records as Government 'poramboke' and the title to the land still vests in the Gov...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. V. Krishnaiah Naidu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-1988
Reported in: AIR1989AP309
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. Arbitration Act is known for several knotty questions it gives rise (o. We are confronted with one such question herein. It is whether an arbitrator appointed under Section 8 or Section 12 of the Act has the power to award interest on the amount awarded by him from the date of his award to the date of realisation, or till the date of decree, as the case may be.2. A contract was entered into between the respondent, Krishnaiah Naidu, and the appellants herein (Government of Andhra Pradesh) for construction of a bridge, at M. 10/4, Chittor-Aragonda Road, including forming of approaches, on 24-3-1977. It is Agreement No. 43/76-77. The contract contemplated work being completed within twelve working months, i.e., on or before 13-6-1978. Time was made the essence of contract. Site was handed over to the contractor on 14-6-1977. The work was not completed within the time stipulated. It was completed only sometime in 1981. The contractor raised a dispute claiming certain ad...
Sponge Iron India Ltd. Vs. Neelima Steels Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-1988
Reported in: [1990]68CompCas201(AP)
Upendralal Waghray, J. During the pendency of several petitions for winding up of the respective companies on the ground that they are unable to pay its debts (in none of which any receiver or official liquidator is appointed), it has been brought to the notice of the court that a reference under Chapter III of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has been registered in respect of each of the respondent companies under section 16(1) of the Act by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ('the BIFR', in short), and the matters were adjourned on more than one occasions awaiting further steps, to be taken in view of section 22 of the Act. Counsel for the petitioners in some of the cases contended that the mere registrations of a reference under section 16(1) will not attract the applicability of 22 of the Act Counsel for the petitioners in some of the cases contended that the mere registration of a reference unde...
G.Y.N. Chainulu and ors. Vs. the Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Amalapur ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-1988
Reported in: (1989)IILLJ81AP
1. The three writ petitions raise common questions of law and fact, therefore, they are disposed of by a common judgment. Admittedly, the respondent-Management introduced new night shift hours. The Union espoused the cause and initiated conciliation proceedings under Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act (14 of 1947) for short, 'the Act'. A report of failure under Section 12(3) of the Act was submitted by the Labour Officer. Thereafter, the Union has issued notice on December 24, 1984, under Section 22, giving 14 days' time for settlement for reviewing the new timings or to amend it suitably or not to give effect to the new right shift hours which would affect their health. It was received on the same day by the Management. Fourteen days' time expired on January 7, 1985. The workmen went on strike for a day on January 10. 1985. But the Management has relied upon the notification issued by the Government in G.O.Ms. No. 375 dated December 27, 1984 declaring the strike of the workmen ...
Coastal Gases and Chemicals (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Co ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-04-1988
Reported in: [1990]76STC349(AP)
Yogeshwar Dayal, C.J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition prays for a declaration that the petitioner's activity does not involve manufacture and its turnover is not liable to sales tax, and for a direction to the first respondent to refund the amount illegally collected towards sales tax for the years 1977-78 to 1985-86, on the secondary sales of the commodity being dealt with by it. It also prays for a declaration that Section 20 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act is null and void. 2. We notice that the petitioner was being regularly assessed from the year 1977-78, onwards and it was never aggrieved of the same. For the assessment year 1986-87 the petitioner is disputing the assessability to sales tax on the commodity sold by it on the ground that it is the same commodity which the petitioner had purchased. 3. Against the order of assessment for the year 1986-87, the petitioner had filed an appeal, and the appellate authority has granted conditional stay limiting it to th...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›