Andhra Pradesh Court March 1993 Judgments

Post Master, Station Kachiguda and Others Vs. G. Hanumantha Reddy, I.A ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. CD. Appeal No. 69 of 1993 : (Crosss Appeal under the Consumers Protection Act, 1986 against the praying to award a compensation of a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in favour of the Cross Appellant herein and a against the appeal filed by the respondents herein). 2. These appeal coming on for hearing, upon parusing the appeal and the order of District Forum and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. H. Prahalad Reddy, Advocate for the appellants in C.D.A. 410/92 and respondents in Cross Appeal No. 69/93 and of Mr. G. Hanumantha Reddy, Party-in-person for respondent in CDA No. 410/92 and appellant in Cross Appeal 69/93 the Court delivered the following Judgment : 3. These two C.D.As. arise out of an order passed in C.D.No. 405/92 in the District Forum, Hyderabad. The C.D.A. No. 410/92 is filed by the opposite party questioning the awarding of compensation of Rs. 10,000/- together with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of order and costs of Rs. 1,000/- within two mont...

Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: (1994)118CTR(AP)187; [1994]206ITR126(AP)

ORDER--Scope.Facts :The assessee filed application under s. 254(2) on the ground that the decision cited by counsel was not dealt with in the order. The Tribunal recalled its order. The justifiability thereof is questioned by the CIT.Held :(i) The Tribunal, being a creature of the statute, has to confine itself in the exercise of its jurisdiction to the enabling or empowering terms of the statute. It has no inherent power. Even otherwise, in cases where specific provision delineates the powers of the court or the Tribunal, it cannot draw upon its assumed inherent jurisdiction and pass orders as it pleases. The power of rectification which is specifically conferred on the Tribunal has to be exercised in terms of that provision. It cannot be enlarged on any assumption that the Tribunal has got an inherent power of rectification or review or revision. It is axiomatic that such power of review or revision has to be specifically conferred; it cannot easily be inferred. Unless there are mani...

Ravada Krishna Rao (Died) Per L.Rs. Vs. Pasupureddy Ananda Rao and ors ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(1)ALT562

ORDERP. Ramakrishnam Raju, J.1. These two Civil Revision Petitions arise out of a common order disposing of E.A.No. 215/85 and E.A.No. 167/85, two applications filed by the petitioners and the first respondent respectively, claiming balance of sale consideration deposited by the plaintiff.2. One Thota Sambamurthy (hereinafter called as the plaintiff) filed O.S.No. 18/77 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Parvatipuram for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 2-11-1976 against Revada Krishna Rao, his wife Revada Adilakshmamma (hereinafter called as vendors) and one Pasupureddi Ananda Rao, first respondent in these Civil Revision Petitions (hereinafter called as the subsequent transferee). Pending the said suit, Adilakshmamma died and her son and daughter were brought on record as defendant Nos. 4 & 5 who are the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 in the C.R.Ps. The suit was decreed against the defendants directing them to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the plaint...

The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Vs. K. Ramesh and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. Heard the counsel for the appellant and the party in person for respondent. 2. The controversy in this case relates to the distance between Khammam bus-stand and Manchukonda stage. According to the complainant, the distance is 12.75 kms. According to the A.P.S.R.T.C., the distance is 15.8 kms., from the bus-stand, Khammam to Manchukonda stage. There is no dispute as regards the fare structure as both sides agreed that it is at the rate of Rs. 0.50 ps. per five kilometers, and stages will be fixed for each five kilometers. If the distance is taken as 15.8 kms., as contended by the A.P.S.R.T.C, the fare fixed by them is correct as it exceeded the third stage, but if the distance is 15 kms. or less than 15 kms., the fare fixed by the APSRTC will not be correct and it could only be less than Rs. 2.75 ps., fixed by them. In view of the dispute as regards the distance between Manchukonda and Khammam bus-stand, the District Forum appointed an advocate commi...

Kolla Veeraswamy (Died Per L.Rs.) and Others Vs. Gondesi Nagara-theemm ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1993AP333; 1993(1)ALT537

ORDER1. The challenge in this revision petition is that the ground on which eviction of the 1st petitioner tenant was sought no more exists, as the landlady who sought the petition schedule premises for bona fide requirement has since died.2. Sri Satyanarayana Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner tenants, states that originally the eviction petition R.C.C. No. 108 of 1980 was filed before the Rent Controller, Rajahmundry, on two grounds viz. (1) acts of waste by the tenant and (2) bona fide requirement for starting business; that the bona fide requirement of the landlady for -starting business was not existing as on the date of the order of the lower appellate Court, as the landlady died and therefore the lower appellate Court ought to have rejected the eviction petition. It is further contended that the decisions of the Supreme Court from time to time would indicate that though normally the High Court would not interfere when there is a concurrent finding by both the courts belo...

S.R. Traders Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Iv and ors ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(3)ALT242; [1994]93STC548(AP)

S.V. Maruthi, J.1. As the issue invoked in these two writ petitions is one and the same, they are disposed of by common judgment. 2. The prayer in the writ petitions is for a direction declaring the action of the 1st respondent for having collected tax from the petitioners by way of cheques on February 21, 1993, without any assessment proceedings as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents not to encash the cheques. 3. Both the petitioners-firms deal in oil business at Tuni of East Godavari district. On February 21, 1993, the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes No. IV (Enforcement) - 1st respondent visited the premises of the petitioners-firms and inspected the business and recorded the statements of the proprietors of the firms. He verified the books of accounts of business and found that the transactions were recorded in the accounts. The 1st respondent after verification and inspection of the records directed the petitioners-firms to...

Makala Seetharamamma and ors. Vs. Thammisetti Peda Kondayya @ Guddikon ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(1)ALT549

ORDERM.N. Rao, J.1. These two letters patent appeals are from the common judgment of a learned single Judge in A.S. Nos. 458 and 460 of 1979 which arose out of two suits O.S.Nos. 16 of 1977 and 48 of 1977 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry.2. Originally, O.S.No. 16 of 1977 was filed in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Rajahmundry as O.S.No. 44 of 1975 and subsequently, on transfer to the court of the II Additional District Judge, it was re-numbered as O.S.No. 16 of 1977. That suit was instituted by Makala Seetharamamma and her two daughters and two sons for declaration of title to the plaint schedule lands comprising five items aggregating Ac.9-41 cents and for a consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants or their representatives from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession and enjoyment. The first plaintiff was the widow of one Pulleswara Rao, son of the first defendant-Rathamma, wife of late Sanyasi who died on 18-1...

Qazi Mahboob Subhani and anr. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(1)ALT712

S.V. Maruthi, J.1. The Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing W.P. No. 11519 of 1991 filed by the appellants.2. The petitioners, two in number, belong to the minority community of Lepakshi village. They filed the writ petition for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the grave-yard situated at Lepakshi village, in S.No. 411/3-B ad measuring Ac. 1.68 cts. and further direction to grant permission for the construction of muslim shopping complex in S.No. 411/3-B belonging to Muslim Mosque, Lepakshi village.3. The case of the petitioners is that Ac. 1.68 cents of land in S.No. 411/3-B situated at Lepakshi village was allotted to muslim community about 100 years ago and the same was classified as burial ground. Since then they were in possession and erected a compound wall fencing around the land after obtaining permission of Sub-Collector, Penukonda on 19-9-1901. By virtue of the user,...

Kuchipudi Bapineedu Vs. Kommareddi Anitha and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1994AP129; 1993(2)ALT271

ORDERSyed Shah Mohammed Quadri,J.1. These two appeals arise out of common facts and raise similar question of law. Therefore, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in C.M.A. No. 164 of 1993.2. The appellant and respondents 1 to 3 constituted a partnership firm in the name and style of 'Kuchipudi Enterprises' to run a Cinema Theatre called 'Durga Theatre'. Disputes arose between the parties. In accordance with the arbitration clause in the partnership deed, the disputes were referred to an arbitrator, who passed the award on 9-12-1991. The arbitrator filed the award in the Court for passing a decree in terms of the award. The first respondent filed an Original Petition under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to set aside the award; and the appellant filed an Original Petition to make the award rule of the Court. While so, the first respondent filed O.S. ...

Dealwell Engineering Works Vs. V.V. Choudary and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(1)ALT729; [1995]84CompCas724(AP)

N.D. Patnaik, J. 1. This revision petition is filed under article 227 of the Constitution against the order passed by the District Forum under the Consumer Protection Act at Anantapur in C.D. No. 47 of 1991. 2. The first respondent filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Anantapur, under the Consumer Protection Act, alleging that he had placed an order with the petitioner for supply of some packaging machinery and paid an amount of Rs. 29,000 by way of two demand drafts, but the petitioner did not supply the machinery and requested the District Forum to direct the petitioner either to supply the machinery or refund the advance paid by him together with compensation. The petitioner did not appear before the District Forum in spite of notice being given to it and, therefore, the consumer forum ordered the petitioner to refund the advance amount paid by the first respondent with interest, with an option to the petitioner to deliver the machinery at the old rate after collect...