Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
J.C. Sreevasthava Vs. the Govt. of A.P. and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP61
ORDER1. The petitioner in this writ petition is the owner of a proprietary concern by name 'Deltronics' which he set up for manufacturing electronic components in Shed No. B-1 allotted to him by the 2nd respondent-Corporation in its Technocrat Industrial Estate at Balanagar. By letter No. SIDC/EA G/TIE/B-1/90, dated 31-5-1990, the 2nd respondent-Corporation, in continuation of its termination notice dated 26-3-1990 issued the following notice :--'1. That your tenancy for shed No. B-1, TIE, Balanagar was terminated w.e.f. 26-4-1990 by us, for the reasons mentioned in our notice cited above. Thereafter, you represented through letter dt. 17-4-90 stating that the amount will be paid before 15-6-90. Your request is not acceded. We had given notice dt. 23-5-90 informing you that the shed would be taken up by the Corporation on 28-5-90 under Panchanama. In spite of our notice you kept the unit locked on 28-5-90. 2. It is now clear that you are not prepared to hand over the vacant possession ...
Adda Kasivisweswara Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)ALT220; 1991CriLJ227
ORDER1. This revision is filed against the conviction of the petitioner under section 16(1-A) and 7 read with 2(i-a)(m) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentence to six months R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. The facts of the case are, that P.W. 1 the Food Inspector, Eluru, visited the shop of the petitioner and found 9 gingili oil tins of 15 kgs. each, and took a sample having purchased 375 grams of gingili oil for Rs. 7-10 ps. under a receipt. He served Form No. VI on the petitioner informing him that he took samples for the purpose of analysis; he divided the said gingili oil into three parts and filled the said parts in three clean, dry and empty bottles and sealed the said bottles according to the procedure prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rules and sent one such bottle to the Public Analyst for analysis, and that the Public Analyst after analysis opined that the sample sent to him is not conforming to Butyrorofractometer reading, Iodine value ...
H. Nagabhushanam and ors. Vs. the Govt. of A.P. Rep., by Its Secretary ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT280
ORDERM.N. Rao, J.1. The Municipal Council, Nalgonda in 1973 and 1980 passed two resolutions, by which certain extent of land belonging to it was alienated in favour of the employees of the Municipal Council on a nominal consideration Rs. 3/- per square yard and Rs. 6/- per square yard respectively. As seven more employees made similar requests in 1985, the Municipal Council by Resolution No. 692 dated 22-2-85 resolved unanimously to accord permission to allot 7 plots to the seven employees including the four petitioners herein, each plot admeasuring 380 square yards at the rate of Rs. 6/- per square yard and sought the approval of the Collector as required by Rule 4 of the Acquisition and Transfer of Immovable Properties Rules, 1967. The Collector by an order dated 26-6-86 in Proceedings No. B3/1662/85 recorded sanction with a modification that the price should be at the rate of Rs. 50/- per square yard but not Rs. 6/- as resolved by the Municipal Council. Thereafter the allottees made...
Y. Dasaratharami Reddy Vs. Y. Venugopal Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-1990
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT553
ORDEREswara Prasad, J.1. The revision is directed against an order of the Vacation Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in I.A.No. 340/90 in O.S.No. 369/90 directing the petitioner not to dispose of item B of the suit schedule property and not to demolish the same. The said order was passed on the application made by the respondents for advancing the date of hearing of I.A.No. 475/90, which was a petition filed by the respondents for granting a temporary injunction, pending disposal of the suit.2. The respondents filed I.A.No. 475/90 on 22-3-90 and it was adjourned to 28-3-90 for appearance of the petitioner. It was subsequently adjourned to 22-6-90. The respondents filed I.A.No. 340/90 before the Vacation Civil Judge for advancing the hearing of I.A.No. 475/90. The learned Judge, instead of advancing I.A.No. 475/90, issued an injunction order against the petitioner with which the petitioner is aggrieved.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri T. Jagdish, contended that the o...
Lakshmi Talkies Vs. State of A.P. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP170
ORDERN.D. Patnaik J. 1. This writ appeal is filed against the order of the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 17641 of 1986. The brief facts which are relevant in so far as the appeal is concerned are as follows: The appellant is a lessee of cinema theatre called 'Lakshmi Theatre'in Rajahmundry. Respondents 3 and 4 and some others are the owners of the theatre. The petitioner has taken it on lease for a period of five years from 1960 and it was renewed from time to time and ultimately it expired on 30-7-1983. The licence for running the cinema hall was also transferred in the name of the appellant in the year 1960 and on application for renewal the licence was being renewed till 31-5-1985.2. An eviction petition was filed by the 3rd respondent herein against the appellant under the Rent Control Act (Act XV of 1960) for eviction from the theatre. But it was withdrawn and a suit was filed in the year 1987 and it is also pending. An application was filed in the suit for appointment of Recei...
The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Guntur and Another Etc. V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-09-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP11
1. These writ appeals have been referred to a Full Bench for considering the question whether the existing holders of stage carriage permits are entitled to submit representations and are also entitled to be heard before the Regional Transport Authority (hereinafter referred to as R.T.A.) when it is considering fresh applications filed after1-7-1989. under Section 70 read with Sections 71, 72 and 80 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Incidentally the question has arisen whether the said existing operators are entitled to copies of the applications filed by new applicants under Rule 166 of the A. P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). As the points arising in all the writ appeals are common it will be sufficient to refer to the facts in W.A. No. 795 of 1990 arising out of W.P. No. 14987 of 1989. The writ petitioner therein (respondent in the writ appeal) is holding a pucca stage carriage permit on the town service route in Gutur town from Syamalanagar to Siv...
Kannula Seshamma (deceased by L. R's.) Vs. M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corpo ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP268; 1991(1)ALT82
1. This second appeal was admitted by the learned single Judge (P.A. Choudary, J.). At the stage of admission it was referred to larger Bench as the learned single Judge felt the decision of the Division Bench in Mustafa Hussain v. Union of India, : AIR1981AP283 , required reconsideration, and he did so without giving any reasons in that behalf.2. Before going into the point referred, it is necessary to indicate the procedure which should be followed by learned single Judges for reference of any matter to a Full Bench. There is no provision in the Appellate side Rules enabling a single Judge directly to refer any matter to a Full Bench. Rule 2 of the said Rules provides that if both Judges constituting the Bench agree that the determination involves a question of law, they may order that the matter or the question of law should be referred to a Full Bench. Rule 6 enacts that notwithstanding anything in the foregoing rules to the contrary, the Chief Justice may direct that any applicati...
B. Youdhister Vs. the Secretary, Agricultural Marketing Committee, Jog ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1990
Reported in: [1990]68CompCas593(AP); 1991CriLJ277
ORDER1. These petitions can be disposed of by a common order as a common question of law arises in these petitions. The Ist respondent-Agricultural Market Committee, Jogipet filed complains against the petitioners for violation by non-payment of market fees under sections 12A, 12B and 12C of the A.P. Agricultural Produce and Livestock Markets Act, 1966 hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. 2. In the complains it is stated by the Ist respondent that a notice under Section 12A of the Act was issued to the petitioners to file the account books, so that the assessment under Section 12B of the Markets Act could be made. Even though a notice was given by the Ist respondent to the petitioners, the petitioners did not file any accounts. Therefore, the Market Committee-Ist respondent assessed the market fee, following the best judgment procedure as provided under Section 12B of the Act. Thereafter a notice was given to the petitioners to pay the amount, but the said amount was not paid, even th...
M.P. Kini Vs. State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1990
Reported in: [1992]75CompCas289(AP); 1991CriLJ272
ORDER1. The petitioner in Crl. Petition No. 916 of '90 is accused No. 1 while petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 in the other petition are accused Nos. 3 and 4 in C.C. No. 24 of 1989 on the file of the Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, Hyderabad at Secunderabad. A1 was the Assistant General Manager, Canara Bank while A3 and A4 were the proprietors of Pankaj Steel Corporation and Chetan Steel Traders respectively. All the accused are under prosecution for offences under sections 120B, 420, 468 and 471 I.P.C. and under Section 5(2) r/w Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The main allegation against the accused is that in pursuance of their criminal conspiracy, current accounts were opened in September and October, '84 respectively in the names of A3 and A4 (A1 being the Manager of the Bank, A3 being the introducer for A4's account and A4 for A3's account) and thereafter A3 and A4 together submitted ten bills (i.e. each five bills) on 1-10-1984 of a total invoice value of Rs. 8.6...
Kanmula Seshamma and Others Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1990
Reported in: [1991]187ITR326(AP)
This second appeal was admitted by the learned single judge (P. A. Choudary J.). At the stage of admission, it was referred to a larger Bench as the learned single judge felt that the decision of the Division Bench in Mustafa Hussain v. Union of India, AIR 1981 AP 283, required reconsideration and he did so without giving any reasons in that behalf.Before going into the point referred, it is necessary to indicate the procedure which should be followed by learned single judges for reference of any matter to a Full Bench. There is no provision in the appellate side rules enabling a single judge directly to refer any matter to a Full Bench. Rule 2 of the said Rules provides that, if both judges constitution the Bench agree that the determination involves a question of law, they may order that the matter or the question of law should be referred to a Full Bench. Rule 6 enacts that notwithstanding anything in the foregoing rules to the contrary, the Chief Justice may direct that any applica...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »