Andhra Pradesh Court October 1992 Judgments

M/S. Vikram Paper Agency Vs. the Regional Manager, Regional Office, Ne ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The Complainant, a registered firm, insured the stocks of paper and stationery belonging to the firm situated in a shop-cum-godown at Rajamundry, East Godavari District with the New India Assurance Company Limited. The policy was issued on 23.2.1984. In a fire accident, according to the complaint, that took place on the same day at about 8.00 P.M. the entire stationery and other articles kept by the insured, were gutted in the fire. The complainant filed a suit O.S. No. 25 of 1985 in the Subordinate Judge's Court, Rajamundry claiming a sum of Rs. 3,98,046.00 against the Insurance Company, being the loss and damage suffered by him on account of the fire. Subsequently during the pendency of the suit, he filed the present Consumer Dispute number 12 of 1990 before this Commission claiming a sum of Rs. 8,02,287.00 with future interest at 18% per annum on the claim of Rs. 3,98,046.00 from the respondent, that is, the Regional Manager, the Divisional Manage...

The Executive Officer, Grampanchayat and Another Vs. K. Prabhakara Red ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The main grievance of the respondent (complainant before the District Forum) is that although he got registered his name at Serial number 74 in the Grampanchayat records for giving water tap connection, but the person at serial number far below him was given water tap connection by the Grampanchayat. On the other hand, the case of the petitioner/appellant, before the District Forum, is that they never gave voluntarily any connection to any person, who is having serial number next to that of the respondent/petitioner, but illegally the person at serial number 83 and some others took connection; and that they will take appropriate action. 2. The serial number of respondent/petitioner in the Grampanchayat records is at serial number 74 is not disputed before us. It is the duty of the Grampanchayat to give water connection according to the serial number. They shall not give water connection to any person, who is having later number than the respondent/pe...

Babburi Krishna Rao Vs. the Special Cadre Deputy Registrar of Co-opera ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1993AP105

ORDER1. In this writ petition, the only point which arises for consideration is the interpretation of Rule 23-AAA of A. P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1964 as to whether it connotes a non obstante clause of absolute nature or it is subject to or in addition to the provision contained under clause 20 of the bye-laws of the Society. A member of the managing committee elected during January, 1992, questioned the proceedings initiated by the 2nd respondent herein seeking to supersede the managing committee as it fell below the number required for quorum as without the said requisite quorum, the committee of the society cannot function. Later, of course, the orders dated 1-10-1992 have been passed superseding the same and the prayer in the writ petition has been amended pursuant to order dated 19-10-1992 passed in W.P.M.P. No. 16726/92 which has been ordered. The impugned order depends upon the result of the decision regarding the interpretation of the rule mentioned supra. It is the conte...

Goutham Television Centre and anr. Vs. Apex Agencies and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1992(3)ALT441; [1994]79CompCas682(AP)

G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. This criminal revision case is directed against an order of the Seventeenth Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, dated July 24, 1992, dismissing a petition in Crl. M.P. No. 2282 of 1991, in C.C. No. 276 of 1991, on his file, filed by the petitioners-accused under section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, holding that the trial court (i.e., Seventeenth Metropolitan Magistrate's Court, Hyderabad) has also got jurisdiction under section 179, Criminal Procedure Code, to try C.C. No. 276 of 1991, filed by the first respondent herein (i.e., the complainant) against the petitioners-accused. It is that order of the learned Magistrate that is being challenged in this revision. 2. The short point that arises for consideration in this revision is whether the court of the Seventeenth Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad has got jurisdiction to try the case in C.C. No. 276 of 1991, filed by the first respondent-complainant, for an offence under section 138 of the...

K. Mahadevan Vs. Y. Venkatesh and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [1994]79CompCas202(AP); 1993CriLJ2659

G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. This criminal revision case is filed by the petitioner-de facto-complainant challenging the judgment of the II Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, dated May 3, 1991, passed in C.C. No. 353 of 1990, on his file, acquitting respondent No. 1 herein (accused) of the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. The gravamen of the charge against the accused is that the accused gave two cheques dated June 25, 1989, and July 20, 1989, for Rs. 3,600 and Rs. 9,500, respectively, drawn on the Vysya Bank Limited, Visakhapatnam, in favour of the petitioner herein in connection with the credit transactions between them, that the petitioner presented both the cheques in the Karnataka Bank on July 19, 1989, respectively, and July 20, 1989, respectively, and the manager of the Karnataka Bank, in turn, sent the cheques to the Vysya Bank Limited for collection, that the Vysya Bank Limited returned those two cheques to the Karnataka Bank on July 20, ...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sponge Iron India Ltd.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: (1993)111CTR(AP)67; [1993]201ITR770(AP)

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, referred the following question of law to the High Court for its opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee could be held to have commenced its business and, therefore, or otherwise, is entitled to the deduction of the administrative expenses and exploration and mining expenses from out of its interest income 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Income-tax Officer to consider, to the extent admissible, the claim of the assessee for setting off of interest received on short-term deposits against unadjusted expenditure for the assessment years 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1979-80 ?' 2. Under the United Nations development programme, the assessee-company was incorporated for establishment of a sponge iron plant. It is a Government company and is a subsidiar...

G. Venugopal and ors. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1992(3)ALT695

Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. These Criminal Revision Cases arise out of the common Judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Anantapur dated 21st October, 1991, passed in Criminal Appeal Nos. 18 to 24 of 1991, on his file, confirming the conviction of the petitioners-accused for an offence under Rule 70(2) of the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce &Live; Stock) Markets Rules, 1969 and Bye-Laws Nos. 44(5) and 45 of the Bye-Laws of the Agricultural Market Committee (Gooty) Guntakal and the sentence of fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer S.I. for one month imposed against each of the petitioners by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Guntakal in S.T.C. Nos. 28 and 30 to 35 of 1990, on his file, dt. 19-12-1990.2. As common questions of law and fact are involved in all the revisions and in the lower appeallate court also all the appeals were disposed of by a common judgment, common judgment is being passed in all the criminal revision cases.3. The brief facts of the cases are as follow...

T. Goverdhan Vs. State of A.P. Rep. by Inspector of Police, North Zone ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1992(3)ALT663

ORDERRadhakrishna Rao, J.1. Since common questions arise in both the cases, they were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. Crl.Rev.Case No. 233 of 1991 arises out of CrL.Appeal No. 10 of 1991 on the file of the 1st Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad which was dismissed confirming the order of the learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad directing the petitioner herein to return the property to the complainant.3. Crl.P.No,859 of 1991 arises out of the dismissal of Crl.R.P. No. 359 of 1991 on the file of the 1st Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad which was filed against the order of the learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, dismissing the petition of the petitioner herein for return of the property to him.4. The facts leading to the filing of the above criminal revision case and criminal petition are, briefly, as follows:On 16-2-1990, theft took place in the house of the complainant in which gold and silver ornamen...

Commissioner, Andh. PrA. Charitable and Religious Institutions and End ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1993AP55; 1993(1)ALT213

1. The defendants are the appellants in this appeal. The respondents filed a suit for declaration that the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments, Gun-tur, dated 28-2-1977 in O.A. No. 66/75 holding that the Hanuman Temple situated at Bade Chowdi, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as the Temple') is a public temple, is null and void, inoperative and that the entry dated 11-11-1342 Fasli registering the temple in the Books of Endowments and the subsequent publications made are null and void, unauthorised, illegal and not binding on the plaintiffs.2. The case of the plaintiffs in brief is that their grand-father, Ram Harak Tiwari has purchased the site on 18-12-1302 Fasli from one Kondaiah under Ex.A-42, sale deed, constructed a super-structure with tin roof, which is used as his residence and has installed Hanuman idol in the said premises bearing No. 170, Residency Bazar, Hyderabad, which is now re-numbered as Municipal No. 4-2-123, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad. Accoridn...

Birguban Singh and ors. Vs. Land Acquisition Officer, R.D.O. and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT173

1. This appeal by the unsuccessful petitioners is from the judgment of a learned single judge, Rama Swamy, J. (as he then was) in W.P.No. 11058/87 dismissing the writ petition challenging the validity of a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short L.A.Act). An extent of Ac.29-18 guntas of land covered by S.Nos. 52/2, 56/2, 57 and 58 at Peerzadiguda, Uppal Mandal in Rangareddy District belonging to the petitioners was acquired for construction of a bus stand by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation. The notification under Section 4(1) of the L.A.Act was issued on 29-3-79. The enquiry under Section 5A was completed on 26-6-79: as possession was not taken within three months from Section 4(1) notification, Section 5A enquiry had to be resorted to under Section 17(5)(b). The declaration under Section 6 was published on 21-1-82 but possession was taken on 4-7-79 pursuant to a letter of consent issued by appellants 1 and 2 agreeing for the acquisition pr...