Andhra Pradesh Court April 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Brindavan Hotel
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-1991
Reported in: (1991)94CTR(AP)249; [1991]192ITR12(AP)
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. As per the direction of this court, the following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that there is no concealment of income in spite of discovery of suppression of sales from the seized material of the assessee ?' In fact, in the reference application filed by the Department under section 256(1) before the Tribunal, certain other questions including a comprehensive question as to whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the provisions of section 271(1)(c) were not attracted in spite of suppression of sales was sought to be referred. But, in the section 256(2) application filed before this court, this question was given up. 2. The assessment years involved are 1970-71 and 1971-72. The respondent-assessee is a firm carrying on hotel business in Hyderabad city. For the year 1970-71...
Garapati Prasada Rao Vs. Parnandi Saroja and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-1991
Reported in: AIR1992AP230; 1991(2)ALT328; 1992CriLJ2561
ORDER1. The petitioner is accused No. 2 in C.C. 70/1990 on the file of the 17th Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The 1st respondent filed a complaint under Sections 52A, 63 and 68A of the Tndian Copyright Act, 1957 against the petitioner (accused No. 2) and two others who are shown as respondents 2 and 3 in the petition.2. The brief facts which are relevant for the purpose of this petition are as follows:--The complainant (1st respondent) was the author of the story of T.V. serial by name 'Himabindu' telecast by the Dooradarshan Kendra, Hyderabad in Telugu in 13 episodes. Due to the fact that the serial evoked lot of interest in the viewers, it was decided to extend it by another 13 episodes. But the complainanat's case is that she was not asked to write the story for the extended 13 episodes. It was got written by some other person and the extended 13 episodes were telecast under the same name, same theme and characters. She therefore filed the complaint against the petitioner who ...
K. Rajender Vs. the Superintendent of Excise, Khammam and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1991
Reported in: AIR1991AP263; 1991(2)ALT146
ORDER1. These two writ petitions raise common question, viz., whether the amendment of Cl. (ii) of sub-rule (f) of R. 29 of the Andhra Pradesh Foreign Liquor and Indian Liquor Rules 1990 (for short 'the Rules), is constitutionally invalid; if not, whether it applies to cases where applications for F.L. 17 licences were filed prior to the date of enforcement of the amended Rule.2. The petitioners in the first writ petition proposed to run a Bar in the name and style of 'Sanai Bar and Restaurant' in Premises No. 9-2-226. Wyra Road, Khammam and applied for the grant of F.L. 17 licence on 11-9-1990 to the 1 st respondent. The petitioner says that he obtained the said premises on a monthly rental of Rs. 4,000/- and paid huge amounts as advance and deposit to the landlord. The 1st respondent directed the Excise Sub-Inspector Khammam to enquire into the matter and submit a report. The petitioner submitted the required certificates from the Commissioner of Municipality Khammam on 24-9-1990 and...
Jalla Seshaiah and Others Vs. Moka Venkateswarlu and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1991
Reported in: AIR1991AP343; 1991(2)ALT547
ORDER1. This civil revision petition is filed against the order D/-15-11-90 in C.M. A. No. 93/90 on the file of the District Judge, Machilipatnam. The learned District Judge by his order allowed the appeal, set aside the order of injunction passed in I.A.No. 324/90 in O.S.No. 47/90 and remanded the matter to the trial court for further enquiry and fresh disposal remarking that findings should be recorded on the real points in controversy viz., whether the area of operation X-1, X-2, X-3, and X-4 lies within the panchayats limits of Nidamarru or Kruthivennu gram panchayats.2. The facts leading to the present civil revision petition are as follows : Intern swamp with an outlet to the sea is situated in between Kruthivennu and Nidamarru panchhayats of Bantumilli taluk of Krishna District. A large number of fishermen in the locality were eking out their livelihood by fishing in the swamp area. Under the Indian Fisheries Act, Act IV of 1897 the Fisheries Department was granting licences to ...
Golden Video Parlour Vs. Secretary, Revenue Department and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1991
Reported in: [1992]86STC67(AP)
A. Lakshmana Rao, J. 1. In this batch of writ petitions, the validity of Ordinance No. 8 of 1988 authorising the levy of tax of Rs. 50 on every show of any film on television screen is questioned, as being violative of articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The Ordinance has been replaced by the A.P. Entertainments Tax (Amendment) Act (23 of 1988). The petitioners in all these writ petitions are exhibitors of films on video. All of them obtained licence in form 'K' for public exhibition of films on video, as required under the provisions of the A.P. Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955 and the Rules made thereunder. The licensing authority fixes the maximum number of persons to be admitted at a time and also the maximum rates of admission. They are mentioned in the licence. The exhibitors are liable to pay the entertainment tax and show tax levied under the A.P. Entertainments Tax Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the Rules made thereunder. In these writ pe...
G. Subbaiah and ors. Vs. R. Subba Naidu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)ALT288
ORDERNeeladri Rao, J.1. The Plaintiffs in O.S. No. 327/90 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tirupati are the revision petitioners. The suit was filed for permanent injunction. The petitioners also filed IA No. 2131/90 praying for temporary injunction pending disposal of the suit. That petition was allowed and temporary injunction was granted. Being aggrieved, the defendants-- respondents filed CM A No. 4/91 on the file of the 3rd Additional District Judge, Tirupati. They also filed IA No. 224/91 praying for interim suspension of the Order of temporary injunction granted by the trial court. When the said petition had come up for consideration, it was made krown to the court that the plaintiffs filed a caveat. The relevant portion of the order of the appellate court reads thus : 'I am of the opinion, even though there is caveat petition, it is expedient and it is necessary to pass some orders as per the represent action made by the learned Advocate for the petitioner as the...
Rajeswara Industries, a Partnersip Firm, D4 Unit and ors. Vs. State Ba ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)ALT365
Jagannadha Rao, J.1. The C.M.A. and C.R.P. are connected. The C.M.A. is filed against the order dated 10-8-1989 passed in I.A. No. 40/89 in O. S. No. 5/87 on the file of the Subordinate Judge. Karimnagar, dismissing the stay application filed by the appellant on the ground that the conditions imposed by the Court on 12-6-1989 have nut been complied with C.R.P. No. 2265/89 is filed by the appellant in the C.M.A. against the earlier order dated 12-6-1989 in 1. A. No. 40/89 imposing conditions for entertaining the application field by the petitioner under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. What happened here was that the respondent-Bank filed a suit O. S. No. 5/87 on the file of Subordinate Judge's Court, Karimnagar for recovery of money. An ex-parte decree was passed on 12-4-1989. The defendants then filed I.A. No. 40/89 under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. forgetting aside the same. They mentioned various grounds to establish sufficient cause or their part for setting aside the...
K. Ramachandra Murthy Vs. Bobbili Rama Rao (Complainant) and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)ALT339
ORDERN.D. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner is the second accused in CC No. 181/89 in the court of the II Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Tanuku. He has filed this petition Under Section 482 Crl. P.C. to quash the proceedings against him. That case was instituted on a complaint filed by the 1st respondent herein for defamation Under Section 500 and 501 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant alleged that there was a news item in the Udayam Telugu daily dt. 27-4-89 making certain derogatory statements about the residents of Kakileru village. The complainant being a resident of that village and he is Upa-Sarpanch of that village says that hi reputation damaged and therefore he filed this complaint.2. The petitioner is a resident-Editor of Udayam Newspaper at Vijayawada. His contention is two fold. One is that the allegations in the case do not constitute an offence Under Sections 500 or 501 IPC and the imputation is of a general nature and is not intended to make any imputation agai...
Chintapalli Suranna and ors. Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)ALT367
ORDERParvatha Rao, J.1. In this Writ Petition the petitioners seek a declaration that the action of the respondents in acquiring their lands in S. Nos. 500/1 (Acres 1-50 cents), 500/2 (Acres 1-35 cents) and 500/3 (Acres 0.24 cents) in Ramachandrapuram as illegal, null and void and for a consequential direction that the respondents shall drop all further proceedings relating to the said acquisition. 2. The main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') made in respect of the impugned acquisition of the petitioners' lands is hit by Clause (ii) of the first proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Act because it was made after the expiry of one year from the date of the publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Act in respect of the said acquisition. Though it was not raised in the Writ Petition, as it relates to a pure question of law, the...
The Andhra Cement Company Ltd., Secunderabad Vs. A.P. State Electricit ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-1991
Reported in: AIR1991AP269
ORDERJagannadha Rao, J. 1. These five C.M.As. are connected and can be disposed of together. Among them C.M.A. Nos. 1545/ 90, 214/91, 223/91 and 224/91 all arise out of interlocutory applications filed by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 841/1990 in the Court of the 5th Addl. Judge, City Civil Court. Hyderabad whereas C.M.A. No. 161/91 arises out of an interlocutory application filed in 0. S. No. 2/91 on the file of Subordinate Judge's Court, Narasaraopet.2. O. S. No. 841/90 is a suit filed by the Andhra Cement Company Limited against the A.P. Electricity Board (hereinafter called the Board) and its officers for a declaration that the defendants are not entitled to take any coercive steps like disconnection of power to the plaintiff's factories at Nadikudi, Vijayawada and Visakhapatnam, either under the Indian Electricity Act or under the Electricity Supply Act or under the conditions of supply, pending the settlement of claims between the plaintiff and the Board and in view of the provision...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »