Andhra Pradesh Court April 1990 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.
K. Venkataramana Reddy Vs. A. Radha and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ498
ORDER1. The petitioner is the complainant in C.C. No. 99/83 on the file of the 2nd Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore. He filed this revision against an order of the Sessions Judge, Nellore, reversing the order of the 2nd Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class in C.C. 99/83. 2. The facts of the case in brief are : The petitioner complainant worked as a Sub-Inspector of Police at Kaluvoya of Nellore District. During that time, on 21-6-81, R-1 and R-2 the Sub-Inspector and Head-Constable of Nellore Town came to him in a jeep and took him to the Central Crime Police Station, Nellore, by making a false representation that he was wanted by the Addl. Superintendent of Police, Nellore. On finding that he was brought to the Central Crime Station instead of to the Addl. S.P., the petitioner questioned them as to why he was misrepresented. Thereupon R-1 and R-2 got enraged and abused him in vulgar language. When the petitioner requested them to behave in a decent manner, they be...
City Dry-fish Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR9(AP)
Ramanujulu Naidu, J.1. This is petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated January 11, 1985, passed by the first respondent in H.R.S. No. 1/62/IT/1981-82 after calling for the records connected therewith and for directing the first respondent to act according to law. 2. The petitioner, a registered firm, engaged in the business of purchasing and selling dry fish, is an assessee on the rolls of the Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, Vijayawada, the second respondent. For the assessment years 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1979-80, the second respondent assessed the petitioner-firm to tax on total incomes of Rs. 1,03,970, Rs. 1,19,170 and Rs. 1,42,700, respectively. On September 11, 1980, the staff of the Income tax Department conducted a survey operation under section 133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. During the said operation, some books of account of the petitioner-firm left in the cu...
Chakala Anjappa Vs. Betappagari Anjaneya Alias Anjappa and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-1990
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT544
Immaneni Panduranga Rao, J.1. The first defendant is the appellant herein. The suit was originally filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs possession over the plaint schedule properties. Subsequently, the plaint was amended seeking the relief of declaration of title. The plaintiff is the father-in-law as well as the sister's husband of the first defendant. The second defendant is the elder brother of the first defendant and the third defendant is the mother of defendants 1 and 2. The fourth defendant is another sister of the first defendant. The suit property consists of two items of wet land measuring Ac.1.23 cents and Ac.1.74 cents, and a house constructed on seven Ankanams of site together with a well and a pump set.2. The plaintiffs case is that he purchased the unit property and some other properties from the second defendant who executed Ex.A-1 sale deed on his behalf and on behalf of the first defendant as karta of the joint...
K. Ramulu and ors. Vs. Shaik Khaja and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ359
Neeladri Rao, J.1. The point for consideration in all these appeals is whether the insurer is liable in regard to compensation to be awarded under Section 92-A, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as (M.V. Act, 1939') and if so, whether any defence is available to the insurer?2. In all these cases the injured or the deceased travelled in lorries, i.e., goods vehicles by paying fare. Those lorries were involved in accidents and these passengers sustained injuries and some of them succumbed to the same. In regard to the latter the legal representatives-cum-dependants filed the applications under Section 110-A, Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation. The injured also filed similar applications. A Division Bench of this court (of which I am also a member) held in Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. M. Bhanumathi 1990 ACJ 1043 (AP), that such passengers are not covered by Act policy and hence the insurance company is not under an obligation to pay the compensati...
income-tax Officer Vs. Autofil and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1990
Reported in: (1990)86CTR(AP)57; [1990]184ITR47(AP)
Bhasker Rao, J. 1. These three appeals are directed against the order of acquittal of respondents Nos. 1 to 5. The income-tax Department prosecuted the respondents for an offence under section 139(1) read with section 276CC of the Income-tax Act on the ground that there was wildful failure in the submission of return by the due date. Since the said default was alleged to be for three different years, there were three different cases filed against them. The delay was 27 months, 16 months and 5 months in these three cases. 2. There is no controversy on the point that there was delay in the submission of the returns of the first respondent-firm by its partners, R-2 to R-5. It is not simple failure in the submission of the returns by the due date that amounts to an offence under section 276CC but that the failure should be 'willful' so as to call for a conviction. 3. The term 'willful failure' is the subject-matter of consideration in Addl. CIT v. Dargapandarinath Tuljayya and Co. : [1977]...
Toddy Tappers Co-operative Society Vs. the Commissioner of Excise and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP40
ORDER1. The Toddy Tappers Cooperative Society, Mahabubabad, Warangal District (for short 'the Society'), the petitioner herein, challenges the proceedings Cr.No. 40949/89/Ex./84 Dt. 20-12-1989 of the Commissioner of Excise allowing the appeal filed against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Excise, Warangal Dt. 23-6-1989 passed in Proceedings No. 1067/89/Ex.E.1 and the consequential proceedings No. 4703/ 88/Ex/ A7/T by the Excise Superintendent superseding the society on 6-1-1990.2. The main contention of the petitioner is that against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Excise, passed under Sec. 76(2)of the Co-operative Societies Act, no further appeal is provided under the said Act and that therefore the order of the Commissioner of Excise dated 20-12-1989 is without jurisdiction and the consequential orders of Excise Superintendent dt. 6-1-1990 is without any basis and illegal.3. It may be appropriate to notice a few facts here. On an application made by respondents 4 to 12...
Forest Range Officer Vs. P. Amanthiah and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP82
1.This writ appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant on the short ground that the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khammam made in Cri. Appeal No. 46/84 is not amenable to writ jurisdiction but that the appellant could have preferred a criminal revision to the High Court. The learned Judge also permitted the appellant to convert the writ petition into a revision. Against this order the present writ appeal has been preferred.2. In this writ appeal, it is contended by the learned Government Pleader that the appeal preferred to the Addl. Sessions Judge was an appeal under S. 44(2F) of the A.P. Forest Act. That section reads as follows: 'Section 44(2F): Any person aggrieved by an order passed under sub-sec. (2A) or sub-sec. (2D) may, within 30 days from the date of communication to him of such order, appeal to the District Court having jurisdiction over the area in which the property has been sei...
K. Ramulu and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-23-1990
Reported in: [1990]185ITR517(AP)
S. Parvatha Rao, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner, a partnership firm, questions the order, Hqs. No. I/59/83-84 dated March 12, 1985, of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Visakhapatnam, rejecting its petition under section 273A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and declining to reduce/waive the penalties levied under section 271(1)(c) and (iii) of the Act. The petitioner prays for a writ of mandamus, etc., directing the Commissioner of Income-tax, Visakhapatnam, to waive under section 273A the penalties levied by the Income-tax Officer, A ward, Rajahmundry, for concealment of income under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment years 1972-73 to 1976-77, as the petitioner had satisfied all the conditions prescribed in section 273A of the Act. 2. The petitioner-firm filed returns of income for the assessment years 1972-73 to 1975-77 and the assessments in respect of the said years were completed by the Income-tax Officer by December 31, ...
Kadari Nageswara Rao Vs. the Joint Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-1990
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT540
ORDERSyed Shah Mahommed Quadri, J.1. The petitioner states that himself and his family members occupied an extent of Ac. 1.92 cents in survey No. 225/1 of Nellipudi village, Sankavaram Mandal of East Godavari about twenty years ago which is just adjacent to their patta land of an extent of Ac.0-93 cents on the north of the said land. He states that after occupying the said land of Ac. 1-92 cents, they had reclaimed the same and they had raised cashewnut trees, mango trees, soapnut trees etc., and were enjoying the said land being in continuous and uninterrupted possession of the same. It is stated that the third prespondent is in the habit of getting pattas for certain poramboke lands and selling the said land unlawfully, making unlawful gain for himself. On the basis of such fictitious documents, the third respondent filed O.S.No. 30/1983 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Prathipadu against the father of the petitioner and two others claiming perpetual injunction on the ground...
Thota Venkataramana Mudali Vs. Thota Sambasiv Mudali (Died) and His L. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-1990
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT537
Ranga Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant in A.S.No. 8/75 on the file of the District Judge, Chittoor against the judgment dated 27th November, 1981 by which the appeal filed by him was dismissed confirming the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Tirapathi made in O.S.No. 138/71. For purpose of convenience the respondent herein will be referred to as 'the plaintiff and the appellant as 'the defendant'. For proper appreciation of the dispute involved in this appeal it would be convenient to state the case of the plaintiff and the defendant briefly as set out in their pleadings.2. The plaintiffs, defendant and one Jagadeesa Mudali are brothers. They got the plaint schedule property by means of settlement dated 2-6-1935 (Ex.A-1). According to the plaintiff they have been enjoying the property jointly since the date of said settlement. He further purchased l/3rd share of his brother Jagadeesa Mudali under a registered sale deed (Ex.A-2) dated 26-6-1963. So the pl...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »