Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
Avadhesh Alloys Limited and anr. Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Electricity ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-05-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT551
Sardar Ali Khan, J.1. The above two Writ Appeals arise curt of a common order dt. 21-11-1990 passed by a learned single Judge in W.P. 8584/90 and batch. The petitioner in W.P. 9652/90 has preferred W.A. No. 1480/90 while the petitioner in W.P. No. 13742/90 has preferred W.A. No. 28/91.2. The impugned order dated 21-11-1990 passed by the learned single Judge has resulted in the dismissal of the writ petitions refusing to interfere with the orders passed by the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board categorising certain industries as negative industries with inadequate social returns and thereby refusing release of new loads or additional loads in favour of such industries.3. The appellants are private and public limited companies who were consumers of electrical energy at their factories situate at various places in Andhra Pradesh. It would be essential to view the common problem arising in these writ appeals in the back ground of the developments which have led to the categorisation of...
Mawubal Bee and ors. Vs. A.P.S.R.T.C.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-05-1991
Reported in: II(1991)ACC725
ORDERJagannadha Raju, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has come up for admission. A few facts are pertinent for deciding whether this appeal can be entertained. The motor accident which gave rise to the claim for this MVOP which was rejected by the tribunal occurred on 29-3-82. The petition was filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chittoor on 18.8.89 indicating as if it is a petition filed under Section 110-A(3) of the old Motor Vehicles Act of 1939. A perusal of the order passed by the District Judge-cum-Chairman of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal indicates that neither the Advocates who appeared in the matter nor the Judge were aware of the statutory changes that were effected by passing of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988, Act 58 of 1988 which came into force on 1.7.89. Dealing with the petition as a petition under the Old Act, the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal came to the conclusion that the delay of 6 years, 10 months and 20 days in filing the OP canno...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Balaji Poultry Agencies
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: [1991]82STC353(AP)
Yogeshwara Dayal, C.J. and Upendralal Waghray, J.1. This tax revision case is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated 1st September, 1988, whereby the learned Tribunal held that 'shell grit' and 'poultry-feed mineral mixture' were covered by entry No. 80 of the First Schedule. The assessing authority had treated the aforesaid items under entry No. 80 but the Deputy Commissioner in revision treated them as 'general goods' under section 5(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The Tribunal, on appeal, held that 'shell grit' was 'poultry-feed' and so was 'poultry-feed mineral mixture'. For this purpose, the Tribunal relied upon its earlier decision in S. Shankarappa and Brothers, Hyderabad v. State of Andhra Pradesh. We asked the learned counsel for the Revenue if 'shell grit' is used for any purpose other than as poultry-feed. He is unable to say if it is used for any other purpose. In any case, 'shell grit' is admittedly used by the poultry. Therefore, both the i...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Thungabhadra Industries Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: [1992]86STC235(AP)
Yogeshwar Dayal, C.J. and Upendralal Waghray, J. 1. The finding of the Tribunal contained in paragraph 5 of the judgment is as follows : 'As already stated the company is having 22 depots in various States. There are a number of wholesale dealers nominated by the appellant under separate agreements entered into with the wholesalers at the time of appointment and the wholesalers are attached to various depots. The wholesalers register their requirements with the depots to which they are attached in order to secure commitments as to the rate. The names of the wholesale dealers, their requirement, the rate at which the commodities are to be sold to the wholesalers are entered in a register called 'souda register'. These 'soudas' are communicated to the factories. Irrespective of the outstanding indents, the factories go on despatching their products to various depots in truck-loads at frequent intervals of three or four days in routine course. The goods are moved as goods of the appellant...
Om Prakash Vs. Patangey Kishanji (Died Per L. Rs.) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)ALT75
ORDERP.L. Narsimha Sarma, J.1. All the three revisions arise out of the same proceedings and between the same parties and therefore, can be conveniently disposed of together. The parties in these proceedings are referred to as landlords and tenant for convenience sake. 2. C.R.P. No. 3560 of 1990 was filed by the tenant questioning the order of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad in R. C. No. 40 of 1987 which itself was filed questioning the eviction order passed In R.C.No. 31 of 1977 on the file of Principal Rent Controller, Hyderabad. 3. C. R. P. No. 279 of 1991 was filed by the landlords against the order of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad in R.A. No. 385 of 1986 which itself was filed against the order in I. A. No. 643 of 1977 in R.C. No. 31 of 1977 on the file of Principal Rent Controller, Hyderabad. 4. C. R. P. No. 280 of 1991 was filed by the landlords against the order of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad in R. A. No. 40 of 1...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›