Andhra Pradesh Court December 1991 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.
Y. Panduranga Chary Vs. State of A.P. Rep. by C.C.S. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT305
Jagannadha Raju, J.1. (Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated therein the High Court will be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest for offence under Section 420 IPC read with 138-A of Negotiable Instruments Act on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstance? of the case.The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and the office note thereby and upon hearing in arguments of Mr.B. Veerabhadra Rao, Advocate for the petitioner and of the Addl. Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.l and the Respondent No.2 not appearing in person or by Advocate.)The Court made the following:-Office NoteFor Orders of CourtCrl. Petition SR. No.8258/91.It is submitted that M/s. B. Veerabhadra Rao and D. Venkaiah, Advocates have filed the above said Criminal Petition for grant of anticipatory bail to the accused without furnishing ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ampro Foods
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1991
Reported in: [1992]196ITR556(AP)
ORDER--Subsidy from govt.--ITO not including in total income--Order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.HELD :The CIT was right in holding that the ITO erred in omitting to bring the amount to tax and that error operated to the prejudice of the interests of revenue. The Tribunal was not justified in holding that the requirements for invoking the powers under s. 263 by the CIT were not satisfied.Income Tax Act 1961 s.263 Business income--PROFITS CHARGEABLE TO TAX UNDER S. 41(1)--Subsidy from government--Assessable under s. 41(1).Income Tax Act 1961 s.41(1) ...
industrial Oxygen Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1991
Reported in: [1992]86STC539(AP)
S. Parvatha Rao, J.1. This tax revision case is preferred against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T.A. No. 209 of 1989 dated March 31, 1990, dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner herein and holding that the charges on retention of cylinders collected from the customers by the petitioner are correctly taxed under section 5-E of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter called as 'the Act'). 2. The petitioner is a manufacturer of industrial gases such as oxygen, acetylene, etc. It fills the gases produced by it in cylinders and sells to the customers. The terms and conditions subject to which the gases were sold by the petitioner establish that the gas cylinders in which the gas was sold were given on loan to customers for their use on a rent-free basis for a limited period only; after that stipulated period, rent per cylinder per day was charged by the petitioner. The petitioner contends that the said rent collected for use of the cylinder ...
The New India Assurance Company Limited, Branch Manager Vs. Boya Sanga ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1991
Reported in: 1993(1)ALT566
Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. The claim has been made on account of the death of the son of the 1st petitioner and the father of the 2nd petitioner in the O.P.No. 340/87. The accident that occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle is undisputed. An amount of Rs. 34,000/- and odd has been awarded as compensation. The Insurance company filed the present appeal.2. The contention that has been raised by the Insurance Company is that the vehicle has to be used for carrying goods or for agricultural purpose but the vehicle involved in the accident is used for sprinkling water purpose which is prohibited under Section 96 of the Statute. Under the circumstances, this court feels that the liability can be fixed jointly on the Insurance Corporation as well as the owner of the vehicle but the entire liability cannot be fixed on the Insurance Company. Therefore, taking into account Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act and the relevant decision of this court, thi...
Andhra Bank Central Office, Rep. by Its Dy. G.M. Sivashankaran and ors ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT477
Sardar Ali Khan, A.C.J.1. Writ Petition 14906/1989: Andhra Bank, Central Office, Hyderabad is the petitioner in this Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records from the first respondent - Tribunal and quashing the Order passed by it in M.P. No. 24/1987 in I.D. No. 59/1985 on 8-4-1987.2. The main question arising for consideration in this writ petition is one of jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal, Hyderabad in passing the impugned order under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. M.P.No. 24/1987 was filed by the Bank under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act stating, inter alia that the respondent (T. Rajendra Prasad) who joined the Bank in Clerical Cadre on 16-6-1981 was placed under suspension and subsequently charge-sheeted for indulging in fraud and misappropriation of Rs. 40,000/- a domestic inquiry was instituted and Inquiry Officer in his report stated that the charges levelled against the respondent ...
M.G. Brothers Vs. the Regional Transport Officer
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT658
M.N. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is the owner of an omnibus bearing registration No. APQ-9347 in respect of which he obtained a pacca contract carriage permit which entitled him to ply the vehicle as contract carriage anywhere in the district of Kurnool. For the quarter ending 30-9-88 the requisite amount of tax Rs. 13,000/- was paid by him. On 29-9-1988 when the vehicle was plying between Kurnool and Adoni, it was checked at a point between Emmiganur and Adoni by the Motor Vehicles Inspector (Flying squad), Kurnool. In regard to that check a V.C.R. - Vehicle check report, was made on the same day, it contains the following alleged irregularities:(1) The vehicle was carrying 13 individual passengers from whom individual fares at Rs. 12/- per head were collected; (2) Driving licence was not produced; and (3) The vehicle was plying at a speed of 90 k.m. p.h.2. A show cause notice was issued based on the above check report calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the vehicle should not ...
Divisional Manager, the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. P. Laxminaray ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(2)ALT383
G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. On 27-7-1985 at Komapally village, an accident took place, due to which one Ravikanth who was travelling along with his friends in a jeep died and his friends received injuries when the jeep driven in a rash and negligent manner dashed against a lorry. A claim for Rs. 1,25,000/- was laid by the parent of the deceased. Having considered the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal held that the accident was the result of the rash and negligent driving of the jeep by the driver and awarded compensation in a sum of Rs. 72,000/-. He made the Insurance Company liable to pay the compensation amount following the Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Pushpa Bai Purushotham Udesh v. Rajit Ginning and Pressing Co, 1977 A.C.J. 343. Aggrieved, the Insurance Company, the 2nd respondent before the Tribunal, preferred this appeal.2. I have been taken by the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant through the Judgment of the lower court. I do not find any...
Azam Ali Vs. the Government of Andhra Pradesh and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT141; 1992CriLJ2597
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. 1. The petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce his son namely, Mohammed Bin Ahmed s/o Azam Ali before this court and consequently set him at liberty forthwith by declaring the detention order as illegal. 2. On 27-9-1991 the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad city, 2nd respondent herein, passed an order under sub-sec. (2) of S. 3 of Act 30/84 read with G.O.Rt. No. 1572 General Administration (Genl. A) Department dated 4-4-1991 directing that the detenu shall be detained under the said Act 30/84 and lodged in the Central Prison, Chanchalaguda, Hyderabad for a period of four weeks from the date of execution of the order. The grounds of the detention in support of the said order were supplied to him on 28-9-91. On 4-10-1991 the petitioner challenged the validity of the said order by filing a habeas corpus writ petition in W.P. No. 12979/91. On 9-10-1991 the Government of A.P., first respondent herein, approved the order pas...
Morisetti Mohan Rao Vs. Tata Subbaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT484
N.D. Patnaik, J.1. The question that is involved in this Second Appeal is whether the Civil Court has got jurisdiction to entertain the suit.2. This appeal is filed by the 4th defendant in O.S. No. 75 of 1982 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Kothagudem. Respondents 1 and 2 filed a suit O.S. No. 11/77 in the Court of the District Munsiff, Kothagudem against the 1st defendant for eviction from the suit premises and for arrears of rent. Subsequently, the 2nd defendant was impleaded as a party. As the 1st defendant died during the pendency of the suit, his legal representatives were added as defendants 3 to 8. The suit was transferred to the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Kothagudem and is numbered as O.S.No. 75/82.3. The suit premises consists of a shop. One of the contentions raised by the defendants is that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction because it is governed by the Rent Control Act. The trial court accepted the contention of the defendants and held that the building is con...
Venkateswara Talkies Vs. Govt. of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT693
ORDER1. In this Writ Petition a question of general importance and frequent occurrence is raised by Sri K. Manikyal Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the question being whether the second proviso to Rule 9-B(c) of the A.P. Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1970, can be invoked in aid by an applicant for grant of permission to construct a cinema building when he furnishes false particulars or information in the application made by him to the licensing authority in Form A-I, which, when brought to the notice of the licensing authority, necessitates an enquiry into the truth or otherwise of the same, completion of which may exceed three months' time. In view of the importance of the question raised, I am of the opinion that this Writ Petition shall be heard by a Division Bench as there is no authoritative pronouncement on the question raised. Place the papers before the honourable the Chief Justice for appropriate orders of posting at an early date.2. This petition coming on fo...