Andhra Pradesh Court July 1993 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.
The India Fruits Ltd., a Company Regd. Under the Companies Act and ors ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)ALT726
ORDERRadhakrishna Rao, J.1. All the above C.R.Ps. are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The common point that arises for consideration in all the C.R.Ps. is whether the pendency of a company petition is a bar for the institution of civil suit.2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the order passed by the High Court in Company petition No. 22 of 1991 amounts to the matter kept pending in the High Court under the Companies Act and that any other matter touching the affairs of the very same matter cannot be allowed to be filed or tried by the Civil Court. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents contends that matters which are not touching Section 10 of the Companies Act can be filed in the Civil Court to get the appropriate relief as the Civil Court's jurisdiction is not barred.3. C.R.P. No. 4206 of 1992 arises out of the suit O.S.No. 709 of 1991 filed by the respondent herein against the petitioners, with the prayer for a declarati...
Karri Venkata Rama Reddy Vs. Megalapu Viswanatham
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-15-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)ALT176
ORDERM.N. Rao, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the Principal District Munsif, Ramachandrapuram, in I.A.No. 890 of 1990 in O.S.No. 95 of 1987, rejecting the prayer of the plaintiff for recasting issue No. 2.2. The suit was laid on the strength of a promissory note for recovery of Rs. 5,475/-. After the written statement was filed by the defendant, the following three issues were framed:'(1) Whether the suit pronote is true, valid and supported by consideration?(2) Whether the defendant is not a 'debtor' under Act 7 of 77 and if so, whether the defendant is entitled to the benefits of Act 7 of 1977?(3) To what relief?'When the suit was posted for trial, on behalf of the plaintiff I.A.No. 890 of 1990 was filed to recast issue No. 2 as under:'Whether the defendant is a debtor within the meaning of Section 3 (j) of Act 7 of 1977 and if so, whether he is not a small farmer entitled to the benefits of the said Act?'3. After hearing both sides the learned District ...
Meela Anthaiah Vs. Meela Vajramma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-15-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)ALT692
ORDERM.N. Rao, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order passed by the learned District Munsif, Jangaon in IA.No. 560/90 in OS.No. 54/80 allowing the application filed by defendants 5 & 6 in the suit for reopening of the suit in order to facilitate them to participate in the trial by examining the witnesses. That application was opposed by the second defendant in the suit by filing a Counter. The learned District Munsif allowed the application without stating any reasons on payment of costs of Rs. 25/-.2. The suit was instituted by the third respondent herein for partition of joint family properties. The father, two sons and daughter are made parties to the suit. Except the second defendant, the petitioner herein, the others were sailing with the plaintiff. The second defendant alone filed a written statement contending that earlier there was a partition. The suit was instituted as far back as 1980. After the evidence of both sides was over, the application was filed fo...
Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors. Vs. B. Koteswara Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)ALT553
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J. 1. These two revision petitions arise out of common order dated 21.1.1992 made in O.P. Nos. 357 and 250 of 1991 on the file of the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court. Hyderabad. 2. In these two revision petitions, the common question of law agitated is as to the jurisdiction of the court below in entertaining application under Section 8(1)(b) of the Arbitration Act and appointing arbitrators as suggested by respondent No. 1 herein, therefore, both the revision petitions are being disposed of by common order. 3. The facts relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue in question are under : Petitioner No. 1 is the Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Secretary Irrigation (Projects Wing) Department, Hyderabad, petitioner No. 2 is the Chief Engineer (Projects), Srisailam Project, Hyderabad and petitioner No. 3 is the Superintending Engineer, Srisailam Left Bank Canal. Circle No. 1, G.V. Gudem, Nalgonda district. Respondent No. 1, who is a Class-1 co...
Badi Guravaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1993
Reported in: 1994(2)ALT261; 1994(2)ALT(Cri)125; 1993CriLJ3496
G. Radhakrishna Rao, J. 1. This is an appeal preferred by the sole accused in Sessions Case No. 216 of 1990, on the file of the Sessions Judge, Nellore, challenging his conviction for the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentence of imprisonment for life, imposed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nellore by his Judgment dated 31st January, 1992. 2. The case of the prosecution is briefly as follows :- The deceased Venkatamma is the wife of the accused and P.W. 2 Munaiah is their son. P.W. 1 is the mother of the deceased. The accused suspected the fidelity of his wife, the deceased on the ground that she developed illicit contact with one Pamula Ramachandraiah (P.W. 6). About six months prior to the death of the deceased, the accused shifted his residence to Baddavolu and was residing with the deceased and his children in the house of Madduru Polaiah (P.W. 3) as a tenant. On 20th March, 1989 at about midnight P.W. 2 got up to answer calls of nature. He then heard his mother crying 'Oya...
Golkonda Real Estate and Finance Corporation a Registered Firm Rep. by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)ALT140
M.N. Rao, J.1. This appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiffs in the suit is directed against the judgment and decree of a learned single Judge of this Court in A.S.No. 820 of 1978 dated 9-2-1984 by which the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Vizianagaram, in O.S.No. 53 of 1975 dated 26-9-1978 was reversed. The suit was instituted by the appellants-plaintiffs for recovery of vacant possession of the plaint schedule premises, G-33, Prince of Wales Market, Vizianagaram after removing the structures thereon, and for mesne profits in a sum of Rs. 15,966-67 ps. for the period from 1-1-1970 to 26-4-1975 at the rate of Rs. 250/- per month with interest thereon at 6% from 26-4-1975 and for determination of future mesne profits from the date of filing of the suit i.e., 26-4-1975 till the date of delivery of possession. The appellants-plaintiffs are three in number. The 1st plaintiff is a partnership firm. The 2nd plaintiff at the relevant time is a minor, represented by the 3rd ...
Bathala Subbarayudu Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ446
G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. The appellants herein who were accused 1 to 3 before the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah, were tried for the offences under S. 498A, and also under Ss. 302 read with S. 34 or in the alternative for the offence under S. 304B read with S. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The State filed Criminal Appeal No. 300 of 1992 questioning the judgment of the Court below in Sessions Case No. 213 of 1990, whereby Accused 2 and 3 were acquitted of the offences and Accused No. 1 was found guilty and convicted for the offence under S. 498A of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced thereunder to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years. Criminal Appeal No. 1315 of 1991 was preferred by Accused No. 1 against his conviction for the offence under S. 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentence thereunder to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years. 3. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the deceased Peddakka was married to Babu, the third son of Accused 1 an...
Mahaveer Bangles Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Tarapet, Vijayawada
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1993
Reported in: [1993]91STC168(AP)
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J. 1. Noticing conflicting decisions of this Court on the interpretation of section 14(2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the APGST Act'), a Division Bench of this Court consisting of M. N. Rao and Reddappa Reddi, JJ., felt that the question needs to be resolved authoritatively by a Full Bench. Accordingly the matter has been placed before this Full Bench. 2. Sub-section (2) of section 14 of the APGST Act lays down : 'When making an assessment to the best of judgment under sub-section (1), the assessing authority may also direct the dealer to pay in addition to tax assessed a penalty as specified in sub-section (8) on the turnover that was not disclosed by the dealer in his return.' 3. The view expressed by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Ramanujulu Naidu and Anjaneyulu, JJ., in Nagabandi Mallaiah v. State of A.P. [1988] 70 STC 160, was that the very same officer who passed an order of assessment to the b...
Yeshpal Roy Vs. Gessulal Dinesh Kumar Mundada and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)ALT484
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the judgment dt. 13-12-1991 in R.A.No. 488 of 1989 passed by the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court at Hyderabd. The petitioner is the landlord and the respondents are tenants.2. The petitioner filed R.C.No. 22/87 seeking to evict the respondents-tenants on the ground of additional accommodation and sought a direction to the tenants to vacate the premises bearing Municipal No. 12-10-394 (ground floor portion) situated at Seethapahalmandi, Secunderabad. The learned Rent Controller, on the basis of the documentary and oral evidence, held that the requirement of the premises is for bona fide purposes and therefore directed eviction. Aggrieved by the said order of the Rent Controller in R.C.No. 22/87 dated 22-8-1989, the matter was carried by way of R.A.No. 488/89 before the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court at Hyderabad.3. On behalf of the respondents-tenants herein, two grounds were mainly agitated before th...
Society of St. Ann's and the Rayalaseema Navodaya Minorities Christian ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)ALT610
A. Lakshmana Rao, Acting C.J.1. Pursuant to an order of reference dated September 26, 1991 passed by a Division Bench of this Court wherein the following questions have been referred for consideration by the Full Bench, Writ Petition No. 5640 of 1991 has been posted before us.(1) Whether it is open to an educational agency to apply for permission to establish an institution in the absence of the competent authority under Section 20 (1) of the Act, notifying in the prescribed manner, calling for applications from the educational agencies desirous of establishing educational institutions?(2) Whether the need of the 'entire State of Andhra Pradesh' or the 'locality' in the context of a particular area, has to be taken into consideration in determining the need of the locality under Sub-section 3 (a) of Section 20 of the A.P. Education Act, 1982?(3) While considering the application under Section 20 of the Act, the provisions of the Act, as amended in 1987, have to be applied?(4) To what e...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »