Andhra Pradesh Court March 1989 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.
Jangam Srinivasa Rao Vs. Jangam Rajeswari and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2506
ORDER1. This is a petition filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to quash the order D/- 21-7-88 passed by the II Addl. Judicial First Clause Magistrate, Machilipatnam in Crl.M.P. No. 397/88 in M.C. No. 18/84 which was confirmed by the Sessions Judge, Machilipatnam in Crl.R.P. 94/88 on 14-11-88. 2. The facts pertinent for decision of this petition are that Jangam Rajeswari the wife filed M.C. No. 18/84 claiming maintenance against her husband J. Srinivasarao. That petition was allowed on 8-10-85 and she was granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 130/- p.m. from the date of the application i.e. 7-12-83. The husband did not pay the maintenance and hence the wife filed Crl.M.P. No. 2386/85 for realisation of the maintenance amount by arresting and sending the petitioner to jail. By an order D/- 23-7-86 the Magistrate dismissed the application on the ground that the wife refused to join her husband without any valid grounds. The Magistrate found that there was sufficient cause for not complying ...
Esic Vs. Tamil Nadu Handloom Weavers Co-op. Society Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-1989
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ414AP
Amareswari, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation under Section 82(2) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 against the order of the Employees' Insurance Court, Hyderabad in E.S.I. Case No. 12 of 1981 dated 31.12.1981.2. The short question that arises for consideration is whether the Employees' State Insurance Act is applicable to the Regional and Sales Offices of the Tamil Nadu Handloom Weavers' Co-op. Society Limited, Vijayawada and the levy of contribution is legal.3. The Tamil Nadu Handloom Weavers' Cooperative Society Limited has its Head Office at Madras and a Regional Office at Vijayawada. It has several branches in the State of Andhra Pradesh. 55 employees are working in the various branches and sales Emporiums. According to the Society, the Regional Office does purely administrative work. They do not do any business of sale and hence the notice issued by the Corporation stating that the Act is applicable is untenable.4. The Corporation ...
Coromandal Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-1989
Reported in: 1989(1)ALT12; 1990(48)ELT333(AP)
K. Jayachandra Reddy, J. 1. Coromandal Fertilizer Limited are the petitioners in this writ petition and seek a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents viz., the Government of India and the Customs authorities, to refund to the petitioner in cash or by a cheque an amount of Rs. 38,67,996,67. 2. The matter arose under the following circumstances : The petitioner carries on the business of manufacture of fertilizer including Gromor NPK. For the purpose of manufacture of Gromor NPK, the petitioner uses Muriate of Potash which suffers customs duty. Under law, admittedly, duty paid on raw material should be given credit while computing duty on finished product. In the instant case, the petitioner sought permission computing to avail set-off of proforma-credit in respect of countervailing duty paid on supplies of muriate of potash purchased and used by the petitioner in the manufacture of fertilizers, under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise acc...
Coromandel Fertilisers Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-1989
Reported in: 1989(23)LC328(AP)
Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. Coromandel Fertilisers Limited are the petitioners in this writ petition and seek a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents viz., the Government of India and the Customs authorities, to refund to the petitioner in cash or by a cheque an amount of Rs. 38,67,996-67.2. The matter arose under the following circumstances: The petitioner carries on the business of manufacture of fertilizers including Gromor NPK. For the purpose of manufacture of Gromor NPK, the petitioner uses Muriate of Potash which suffers customs-duty. Under law, admittedly, duty paid on raw material should be given credit while computing duty on finished product. In the instant case, the petitioner sought permission to avail set-off of proforma-credit in respect of counter-vailing duty paid on supplies of muriate of potash purchased and used by the petitioner in the manufacture of fertilizers, under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules. The Assistant Collector of Central Excises accorded necess...
M/S. Royal Printing Works and Others Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-1989
Reported in: AIR1990AP120
ORDERAmareswari, J. 1. The short question is when an order is passed directing the party to furnish immovable property security to the satsfaction of the Court below whether the security can be offered by way of deposit of title deeds which necessarily obviates theregistration involving considerable expenditure.2. This Court passed an order in C.M.A. No. 335 of 1985 on 14-4-1986 directing the petitioner to furnish immovable property security for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judge-cum-Second Additional Special Judge for S.P.E. and A.C.B. Cases, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The petitioner furnished third party immovable property security. He offered to deposit the title deeds and create an equitable mortgage. But the learned Judge declined to accept the bond observing that since immovable property security is involved it is compulsorily registerable under S. 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act. The learned Judge further observed that the petitioner can seek ...
Pujari Changal Reddy and ors. Vs. M. Santha Kumari and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-1989
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT340
Panduranga Rao, J.1. Defendants 3 to 5 have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Additions Subordinate Judge, Chittocin O.S.No. 50 in a suit for partition of the plaint schedule properties into two equal shares and for allotment of one such share to the plaintiffs, who are the purchasers of the property from defendants 3 to 5.2. The plaint allegations in brief are that the properties belong to the joint family of Pujari Venkata Reddy (great grand father of defendants 3 to 5) Narayana Reddy (the grand father of defendants 1 and 2) and Chinna Reddy; that the relationship of the parties is shown in the Geneological Tree appended to the plaint; that Chinna Reddy's branch having become extinct, defendants 1 and 2 representing the branch of Narayana Reddy have one share; that defendants 3 to 5, who represent the branch of Venkata Reddy, are entitled to the remaining half share, that during the childhood of defendants 3 to 5, their mother went to Dhanoja varipa...
D. Ramachandra Rao Vs. Veeraraghava Reddy and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-1989
Reported in: I(1990)ACC544
Ramaswamy, J.1. On January 20,1979, at about 2.50 p.m., one D. Ramachandra Rao, the owner of the scooter bearing No. APO 4577 was proceeding from Kazipet to Hanumakonda and on the way the claimant Vceraraghava Reddy requested him to give a lift and it was acceded to. When they were proceeding, a RTC bus was coming in opposite direction and the scooter driver Ramachandra Rao tried to overtake (Sic. cross) the bus. While so, Ramamohan Rao, the driver of the motor cycle (Jawa) bearing No. APO 4542 overtook the bus from behind and he also crossed the middle point of the road and when it reached the scooter, the crash bar of the motor cycle hit the right leg of the claimant Veerara have Reddy and he sustained injuries. Accordingly, he laid a claim for Rs. 50,000/ under Section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Tribunal below awarded a sum of Rs. 8,250/- as against Ramachandra Rao, the owner of the scooter (first respondent) against which the appeal has been filed. The contention that...
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. S.A. Gafer and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-1989
Reported in: I(1990)ACC85
K. Ramaswamy, J. 1. This case raises an interesting question of law. The admitted facts are that on September 6,1979 the claimant S.A. Gafer was proceeding on a moped bearing No. APC 6689 at about 9.00 a.m. When he was near Government Arts & Science College, one G. Prabhaker Naidu, the first respondent before the Tribunal below, riding the motor cycle bearing No. APC 1117 rashly and negligently coming from the opposite direction, dashed against the claimant. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries. Under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (Act IV of 1939) a petition was laid before the Tribunal below against Prabhaker Naidu, Rajendra Naidu, the owner of the motor cycle bearing No. APC 1117 and the insurance company, the appellant herein. The claimant was examined as PW1 and two eye- witnesses were also examined. On a consideration of the evidence on record, it was found that Prabhaker Naidu had driven the motor vehicle rashly and negligently. The evidence of PW1, claimant, cor...
K. Sivaram Vs. K. Mangalamba and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1880
ORDER(1) The husband is the revision petitioner. He filed this revision against the Judgment of the Court of the IInd Addl. Munsiff magistrate, Ongole in M.C. No. 8/1982. The facts of the case are that the petitioner herein is a handicapped person having lost both his legs due to polio. He is working as an officer in the Accountant General's Office at Hyderabad. He married the respondent No. 1 in the month of December, 1969 who is a deaf and dumb lady, out of sympathy to the handicapped persons. Thereafter they lived amicably and happily. Respondent No. 2 is the elder daughter born to them on 9-4-1972. Respondent No. 3 is the younger daughter born to them on 27-7-1974, and the family lived happily up to the year 1982. Thereafter, it is the case of the respondents that they were thrown out by the petitioner from his house on 17-6-1982 by giving them Rs. 70/- and asking them to go to the parents' house of respondent No. 1. Accordingly, they went there and there they lived. Thus, they hav...
Bala Swamy and Others Vs. Govt. of A.P. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-1989
Reported in: AIR1990AP135
ORDER1. The petitioners, who are 145 in number, seek a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the compensation amount due to them in the land acquisition proceedings. In this case, the award has already been passed and the parties approached the Civil Court for enhancement of the compensation. The Civil Court accepted their contention and enhanced the compensation. Aggrieved against the said judgment, the Govt. preferred an appeal before this Court, but this Court directed the Government to deposit the amount. The only remedy that is available to the petitioners for recovery of the amount is by filing an execution petition as contemplated under O.21, C.P.C. Order 21, C.P.C. provides for the machinery in the event of not paying the amount. When specific remedy is available for recovery of the I amount, the petitioners cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution. In a case where the party has get a remedy under O.21, C.P.C. for ex-ecuting th...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »