Andhra Pradesh Court December 1992 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.
Mohd Afzal Vs. Common Wealth Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Director
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)ALT35
ORDERP.L.N. Sarma, J.1. This contempt case has been filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No. 1426 of 1987 on the file of IVth Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Petitioner herein is also the petitioner in C.R.P. No. 240 of 1990.2. For convenience sake, the parties will be referred to as landlord and tenant.3. The petitioner is the landlord. This contempt case was filed for punishing the respondent herein (tenant) under the Contempt of Courts Act for wilful disobedience of the directions of this Court made in C.R.P. No. 240 of 1990 dated 19-3-1991.4. Relevant facts are as follows: Petitioner-landlord filed O.S.No. 1426 of 1987 on the file of IVth Addl. Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for recovery of possession of plaint schedule property and for other reliefs. Pending the said suit, he filed I.A.No. 1077 of 1988 to direct the respondent-tenant to deposit entire arrears of rent and also to continue to deposit the rent every month. The said application was based on the ground that...
Mohd. Afzal and anr. Vs. Common Wealth Hotel Private Limited, Rep. by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)ALT17
ORDERP.L.N. Sarma, J.1. Plaintiffs are the petitioners in this revision. This revision is filed questioning the order of the IVth Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad dt.1-7-1991 dismissing I.A.No. 525 of 1991 in O.S.No. 1426 of 1987 filed for delivery of possession of the suit schedule premises.2. For convenience sake, the parties to this revision are referred as landlords and tenant.3. Landlords are the petitioners. They filed the suit O.S.No. 1426 of 1987 on the file of IVth Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for recovery of suit schedule building after terminating the tenancy. The respondent-tenant took the premises on lease from the landlords to run a hotel. The amount payable to the premises per month was fixed at Rs. 10,000/- (Rs.6,000/- towards accommodation and Rs. 4,000/- towards fixtures and fittings). Landlords also sought a decree for arrears of rent as well as future rents etc., in the said suit.4. Pending suit, landlords filed LA. No. 1077 of 1988 for...
A. Saleem Vs. Smt. S. Vasantakumari
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1992
Reported in: 1994(2)ALT57
ORDERG. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. Both the Courts below concurrently found that there is wilful default in payment of rent to the respondent-landlady. Ex. A-4, certified copy of the reply notice dt. 5-4-83 belies the allegation of the petitioner-tenant that his original landlord did not intimate to him about the sale of the Petition schedule premises to the respondent-landlady. The allegation that the petitioner-tenant could not pay the rent either to the original owner or to the respondent-landlady as he could not know-whether the respondent-landlady actually purchased the petition schedule premises or not, is false as rightly observed by the Courts below. Now the contention that has been raised is that originally a suit, O.S.No.342 of 1983 has been filed by the respondent-landlady treating the Petitioner-tenant as trespasser and reserving her right for damages and after the verdict of the Supreme Court, eviction petition has been filed and the arrears of rent or damages during that peri...
Smt. P. Rama Devi Vs. the Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by the Sec ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)ALT179
ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. This writ appeal raises an important point for consideration with regard to maintainability of an appeal directly before the Government under Section 89 of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982 (for short 'the Act') against an order passed by an officer or authority other than the Director.2. The lis arose inter se two lady lecturers, the writ petitioner-appellant herein and the 3rd respondent, with regard to their continuance of service in the College of the 2nd respondent. The appellant was appointed as Junior Lecturer, while the 3rd respondent was appointed as a lecturer. It is stated that there was no post of Junior Lecturer and as such, the appellant was later on treated as a Lecturer. The 3rd respondent was appointed as a lecturer temporarily during the leave period of one Mr. P. Sudarshan. Since the said Sudarshan returned and resumed the post, the services of the 3rd respondent were terminated by order dated 30-9-1983. The writ petitioner-appellan...
Tallapakam Venkata Srinivasacharyulu (Died), Per L.Rs. Vs. Tirumala Ti ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)ALT293
M.N. Rao, J.1. As all these matters are inter-connected, they are disposed of by this common order.2. Writ Appeal No. 1752 of 1987 arises out of W.P.No. 11437 of 1986 filed by Tallapaka Venkata Sreenivasacharyulu, the appellant herein, seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the Tirumala-Tirupathi Devasthanams (for short 'the T.T.D.') represented by its Executive Officer to pay compensation in respect of Ac.3-50 cents of land covered by Survey Nos. 679/2 and 645 situate at Tirumala village in Chandragiri Taluk, Chittoor District. The case of the appellant was that the Inams Deputy Tahsildar, Chittoor in the proceedings under Sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the Andhra Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 (for short 'the Inams Abolition Act') rendered a decision after enquiry that an extent of Ac.28-58 cents covered by Survey Nos. 586,645 and 679 of Tirumala village are inam lands in ryotwari village and not held by an institution. The appeal preferred by the T.T.D., aga...
The Superintending Engineer and anr. and the State of A.P., Rep. by th ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1992
Reported in: 1993(2)ALT687
1. These eight cases, 4 C.M.As and 4 C.R.Ps. and together with the Cross-Obections arise out of the common Judgment dated 6-9-1989 passed in four Original Suits and four Original Petitions on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Ongole. The parties in these cases are common. They will be referred to as the contractor and the State respectively.2. The contractor entered into four agreements with the State for 'Providing Lining to the bed and side slopes of the Pamidipadu Branch Canal of N.S.Canals from K.M.O/4 to O/6.' Disputes arose between the parties with regard to the works which were the subject matter of the said contracts. The disputes were referred to a sole arbitrator who passed four awards on 18-4-1986. In regard to the awards relating to agreement Nos.8 to11/SE/82-83 the contractor filed Original Suits No. 59/86, 55/86, 53/86, and 57/86 respectively to make the awards rule of the Court, whereas the State filed O.P.Nos. 85/86, 86/86, 87/86 and 88/86 respectively under ...
Procter and Gamble India Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-22-1992
Reported in: 1994(46)ECC166; 1994(69)ELT442(AP)
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of Mandamus praying to quash the decision of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Hyderabad, in C. No. V/30/17/19/89. V.C.I. dated 12-4-1990 after declaring that the petitioner's products Vicks Vaporub and Vicks Inhaler (hereinafter referred to as 'the products') fall under sub-heading 3003.30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short CETA) and for consequential direction restraining the respondents, their servants, officers and agents from levying and recovering duty of excise under sub-heading 3003.10 with immediate effect and for a further direction quashing the proceedings before the Collector (Appeals) including the order for refund of the duty paid by the petitioner from 15th April, 1985 and for costs. 2. It would be appropriate to note the relevant facts which led to filing of this Writ Petition. 3. The petitioner is a company registered ...
Kundavarapu Kondaiah @ Erra Kondaiah and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Prad ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-22-1992
Reported in: 1994(2)ALT209
M.N. Rao, J.1. This appeal filed by A-l to A-5 and A-7 to A-9 is from the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vijayawada in Sessions Case No. 5 of 1987 dated 8-10-1991. A-l to A-5 and A-7 to A-9 are the appellants herein. Originally, eighteen accused were tried by the learned Judge on nineteen charges. A-l, A- 2, A-5, A-8 and A-9 were convicted for the offence under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to life imprisonment. A-3 and A-7 were found guilty in respect of charges 1,4,6 and 7 and each of them was sentenced to a term of four years rigorous imprisonment besides lesser convictions for other charges. A-4 was convicted for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default two months simple in prisonment. A-7 and A-8 were convicted in respect of charge No. 13 for the afsence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them w...
The Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India and anr. V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-18-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)ALT77
Bhaskar Rao, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the respondent - Life Insurance Corporation of India, Machilipatnam, assailing the judgment of the learned single Judge allowing the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner. The facts of the case are that the writ petitioner-respondent herein was appointed by the appellant - Corporation as a Probationary Development Officer with effect from 25-6-1984 in the prescribed scale of pay. He was posted at Ponnur, Guntur District. The order of appointment says that he will be on probation for a period of 12 months, which may be extended for a further period of 12 months. Clauses 3 to 5 in the order of appointment deal with the code of conduct to be followed by the employee; Clauses 6 to 9 deal with tours, advance deposits, record of work and collection of premiums; Clause 10 deals with the minimum buiness that the writ petitioner is expected to do; and Clause 11 deals with confirmation and increments.2. As per the terms of the appointment order, ...
Valaparla Bhaskara Rao Vs. Chegu Madhava Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-18-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)ALT404
ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J.1. This revision is filed against the order of the 1st Additional District Munsif, Guntur in E.P.No. 111 of 1991 in O.S.No. 407 of 1990 dated 21-10-1991, allowing the petition filed by the respondent-decree holder under Order 21 Rule 46 of the Civil Procedure Code for attachment of the share capital of the Petitioner- judgment-debtor in a Co-operative Society.2. The brief facts are as follows:- The petitioner is working as a Guard in the State Bank of India. He is a member of the State Bank of India Employees' Co- operative Credit Society, Guntur. He invested Rs. 2,000/- towards his share capital in the society. The respondent is a money lender from whom the petitioner took loan. The interest payable is very high. The respondent filed a suit O.S.No. 407 of 1990 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Guntur, against the petitioner and obtained a decree. In execution of the said decree, the respondent filed E.P.No. 111 of 1991 on the file of the 1st Additional D...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »