Andhra Pradesh Court February 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.
Shivada Pillay and ors. Vs. S.V.S. Prasad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ590
ORDER1. This contempt case has been filed for initiating proceedings against the sole respondent viz. Sri S. V. S. Prasad, I.A.S., who was the Vice-Chairman and the Managing Director of A.P. Dairy Development Co-operative Federation Limited, Lalapet, Hyderabad for gross violation of the order of this Court passed in W.P. No. 6720/84 dated 21-4-1987 and to punish him for the same. 2. In order to appreciate the controversy arising in this matter it would be necessary to reproduce the operative portion of the order of the single Judge in W.P. No. 6720 of 1984 which is in the following terms : '....... In this view of the matter Writ petition No. 6720 of 1984 is allowed and a mandamus will issue to the respondent to treat petitioners 1 to 21 as the employees of the respondent-Federation and to fix appropriate regular scale of pay as applicable to the employees of the Federation. But in the circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs.' 3. The matter was carried by the resp...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Suvarna Enterprises
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1991
Reported in: [1992]85STC120(AP)
Yogeshwar Dayal, C.J. and Upendralal Waghray, J. 1. This tax revision case is directed against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal made in T.A. No. 21 of 1986 dated 11th August, 1988. 2. M/s. Suvarna Enterprises, dealers in cotton, filed Central sales tax VI returns for the assessment year 1983-84 declaring their gross and net turnover at Rs. 17,34,567. Out of this amount, the assessee claimed exemption on a turnover of Rs. 1,18,020 on the ground that their turnover related to sale of lint purchased from Bellary in Karnataka State and sold to a dealer in Coimbatore in Tamil Nadu State. 3. The assessing authority as well as the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Kurnool took the view that the goods purchased by the assessee were consigned to Nandyal and thereafter they were sold to a dealer at Coimbatore. Therefore, they are of the view that these two were independent transactions and the assessee had brought the goods from Bellary to Nandyal and then sold to a dealer at Co...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Deccan Leathers Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1991
Reported in: [1991]82STC129(AP)
Yogeshwar Dayal, C.J. and Upendralal Waghray, J.1. This revision under section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, is filed by the State against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 20th September, 1988, in T.A. No. 608/1988 by which it allowed the assessee's appeal setting aside the judgment of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, which had confirmed the order of the Commercial Tax Officer. 2. We are concerned with the assessment year 1980-81 and the controversy is about refund of State sales tax paid on declared goods, as those declared goods are subsequently subject to Central sales tax because of inter-State sale. The facts found are : The assessee purchased raw hides and skins and paid a tax of Rs. 76,927 on these under the provisions of the Andhra pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Act'). Subsequently, after process of tanning he sold the resultant tanned hides and skins in the course of inter-State trade and ...
Mohd. Jahangir Vs. Mallikharjuna Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. Rep. by I ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT575
ORDEREswara Prasad, J.1. The petitioner in both these revisions is the defendant in OS No. 517/ 86 filed by the respondent in the Court of the Principal District Munsif, Hyderabad (East and North), for a permanent injunction restraining the petitioner from alienating the suit lands in an extent of Ac. 8-20 guntas in Survey No. 57 in Karmanghat village, Saroornagar Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.2. The case of the respondent is that an agreement of sale dt. 15-8-81 (Ex. A-18) was executed by the petitioner in favour of the respondent, for sale of the suit lands at the rate of Rs. 20,000/-per acre and that the respondent paid Rs. 1,70,000/-on various dates by 10-8-82. It was the further case of the respondent that an agreement dated 3-12-82 (Ex. A-7) was executed by the petitioner along with his daughters and sons and the consideration was increased to Rs. 40,000/- per acre and that the possession of the lands was delivered to the respondent on the date of the first agreement. It w...
A. Narayana Reddy and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)ALT452; 1992CriLJ630
Ramanujulu Naidu, J.1. It is true that in Writ Petitions Nos. 14954, 14986, 15806, 15038, 14975, 14039, 15037, 15022 and 14964 of 1990 disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court, I observed speaking on behalf of the Division Bench : '..... Even under Section 309(2) of the1973 of Criminal Procedure for remanding an accused person to Judicial custody the requirement of natural justice particularly that of audi alteram partem should be complied with. Production of the accused person is an indispensible requirement of natural justice and fair procedure as the order of remand seeks to deprive him of his personal liberty. Even if S. 309(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in terms has not provided a right of hearing before the remand of the accused person the requirement must be read into the same as held by the Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, : [1978]2SCR621 .' The Division Bench did not, however, held that non-production of the accused person either before the Magistr...
Techno Pack Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT542; 1991(33)ECC130; 1991(55)ELT158(AP)
M. Jagannadha Rao, J.1. The petitioners are (i) M/s. Techno Pack Ltd., and (ii) J. Krishna Murthy. The 2nd petitioner is a share-holder and Director of the 1st petitioner. The relief claimed in the Writ petition is for the issue of a Writ of Prohibition directing the respondents to refrain from enforcing the Demand Notice No. V/15A/30/656/83. T. 2, dated 29-5-1989 issued by the Central Excise Department, represented by respondents 1 and 2. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows : The 1st petitioner-Company was engaged in the manufacture of Polyethylene Coated Gunny Bags in its factory at Visakhapatnam. It used to purchase duty-paid LDPG granules for manufacture of LDPE lay-flat Tubings and Films, which in turn were captively used in the manufacture of the above mentioned gunny bags. The LDPE lay-flat tubings and films were classified under Entry 15A (2) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). However, this intermediatory pr...
E. Thiraj Vs. D. Narayana Swamy and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT571
ORDERN.D. Patnaik, J.1. This Petition is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. 99/90 on the file of the Vth Additional Munsif Magistrate, Chittoor. That case was instituted on a complaint filed by the respondent against the petitioner under Section 211 I.P.C. From the allegations made in the complaint it appears that the petitioner had sent a petition to the Honourable Minister for Revenue, Government of A.P. Hyderabad, against the complainant D. Narayana Swamy who is working as U.D.C. in the Office of the Assistant Director, District Survey and Land Records, Chittoor. The com plaint has been filed under Section 211 I.P.C. alleging that they are all false allegations and there is no just and lawful ground for making such a charge. Section 211 I.P.C. reads as follows:'Whoever, with intent to cause injury to any person, institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal Proceeding against that person, or falsely charge any person with having committed an offence, knowing that there is n...
D. Syamala Vs. the Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyder ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT639
ORDERRadha Krishna Rao, J.1. The petitioner claims that she has an agreement of sale executed in her favour in the year 1980 and thereafter, without obtaining any permission from any competent authority, she constructed the house and the compound walls. According to her, the municipal authorities came and, without any notice, sought to demolish the compound walls. Notice has been issued to the learned S.C. for the M.C.H. He represented that the compound walls were constructed without any permission and they have already been demolished. Admittedly, in this case, the following facts emerge. The area was declared as a 'slum area'. No lay-out has been sanctioned. The petitioner was served with notices in 1981, 1987 and also in 1989. The documents in support of her claim were directed to be produced. But no attempt has been made by her to produce them. But, according to the petitioner, she submitted an explanation. On the admitted facts, when construction was made in a 'slum area' it is an...
Agarwal Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1991
Reported in: 1992(57)ELT561(AP)
1. The petitioners M/s. Agarwal Industries Limited, Industrial Area, Azamabad, Hyderabad, have filed the present writ petition for a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from giving effect to Notification No. 39/89-C.E. (NT), dated 25-8-1989 prior to 30-8-1989 and to permit the petitioner to utilise the unavailed credit which was accumulated on the use and hydrogenation of rice bran oil prior to 30-8-1989. 2. Vanaspati (hydrogenated vegetable oil) is normally manufactured from conventional oils. To encourage use of minor oils, the Central Government introduced in 1986-87 a scheme of rebate in excise duties for Vanaspati and soap linked to user of minor oils like rice bran oil, mahuva oil, water-melon seed oil etc. The Central Government inserted on 1-3-1987 Section AAA containing Rules 57K to 57P in Chapter V of the Central Excise Rules. On that date the Government also issued notification under Rule 57-K viz., Notification No. 27/1987 and Notification No. 40/1987 specifying th...
Assistant Secretary to Government, Home (Courts-c) Department, K.V.L. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT439
M.N. Rao, J.1. Writ Appeal No. 1773 of 1988 by the Government of A.P., (second respondent in the writ petition) is from the judgment of the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 5415 of 1981/by which the claim of the first respondent (writ petitioner) was allowed and a Mandamus was issued directing the State Government and the High Court to pay full arrears of salary and allowances to the writ petitioner from the date of his promotion and revise his pension in the light of the revised pay and allowances. A time limit of three months was also set for effecting the revision in his pension. The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 3917 of 1989 and the first respondent in Writ Appeal No. 1773 of 1988 are similarly circumstanced. In view of the commonality of the questions that fall for consideration in W.P. No. 3917 of 1989 and W.A. No. 1773 of 1988, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The first respondent in W.A. No. 1773 of 1988 and the petitioners in W.P.No. 3917 of 1989 are...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »