Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
O. Sundara Rami Reddy and ors. Vs. the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Oil ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)ALT(Cri)513; 1994CriLJ34
ORDER1. This is a petition filed by the petitioners-accused under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 9 of 1993 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sullurpet. 2. The first respondent is an apex body at the State level in the three-tier pattern of the co-operative societies, having been established in 1983 to restructure oil seeds production in the State and also to increase and develop the oil seeds farming in some selected districts of the State and Nellore District is one among such districts. In pursuance of the agreement entered into between the parties, a quantity of about 1302 mts. of groundnut pods was carted to the premises of the concerned industries from 3-4-1992 to 26-6-1992 and again on 27-7-1992. According to clauses 3.2 and 3.3 of the agreement the petitioners/accused should arrange for the unloading and storage of stocks in the premises of their industry and according to clauses 3.13 and 3.18 they are also responsible for the safety ...
The Provident Fund Inspector, Anantapur Vs. the Andhra Co-operative Sp ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)ALT(Cri)431; 1994CriLJ1132
1. All these criminal appeals are preferred by the Provident Fund Inspector, Anantapur, who is the complainant before the trial court, challenging the order of acquittal dated 22-2-1991 passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Guntakal, in S.T.C. Nos. 1 to 6 and 8 to 13 of 1987, on his file. 2. The complainant-Provident Fund Inspector, Anantapur, filed a complaint against the accused for the offence under S. 14(1A), 14A(1) and 14A(2) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, as the accused have failed to remit the employer's share of provident fund. 3. The lower court held that the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused relate to the months of July, August and September, 1984, and the complaint, having been filed on 19-9-1985, is definitely barred by limitation according to S. 468, Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate has also relied upon the decision reported in E.P.F. Organisation v. M/s. Shalimar Biscuits, (1979) 1 APLJ (HC) 173 to come...
M. Narasimhulu Vs. the Excise Superintendent and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)ALT179
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. The writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the order Rc.No. 647/91/A2 dated 13-5-1993 of the first respondent as arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently a direction is sought by the petitioner to direct the first respondent to permit the petitioner to continue him to run Nellore group (8) toddy shops for the Excise year 1992-93 pursuant to the agency granted to him by the first respondent in proceedings Rc.No. 647/91-A2 dated 11-4-1993.2. The short question that falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether the petitioner is entitled for a notice as contended by him.3. Admittedly, the group of toddy shops in Nellore were put to auction some time before the commencement of the Excise year 1992-93. It is not in dispute that during that period in Nellore district, there was agitation by women against the sale of toddy in the entire State of Andhra Pradesh, in particular in the district of Nellore....
Pujari Venkatasubbaiah and ors. Vs. Sree Madduleti Narasimha Swami Tem ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)ALT287
D.J. Jagannadha Raju, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the defendants against the judgment and decree dated 27th November, 1991 in O.S. No. 15 of 1979 on the file of the II Additional Judge, Kurnool. The suit was originally filed and numbered as O.S. No. 9 of 1976 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge's Court, Kurnool. The plaintiff-temple represented by the Executive Officer filed a suit for recovery of possession of the temple lands shown in the schedule situated in Rangapuram, Gutupalle and Katikavanipalle villages from the defendants who claim to be the Poojaris of the temple. It is the claim of the temple that the temple is the absolute owner of the property and that it is a grant given to the temple. The defendants claim that it is a grant given to the Archakas burdened with service. They claim that as they have been performing services regularly and efficiently, they are entitled to be in possession of the properties. They also claim that no separate emoluments were fix...
Thummala Chandrasekhar Rao Vs. Guguloth Vasram
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)ALT313
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. This revision petition is filed under Section 91 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 aggrieved by the order dated 3-8-1990 in C.M.A.No. 4 of 1988 made by the joint Collector, Khammam.2. The case of the petitioner is that by virtue of an agreement for sale dated 8-6-1965 entered into by the father of the petitioner with the respondent for the purchase of land to an extent of Ac. 1-20 guntas in S.No. 739 situated in Bayyaram village of Khammam district, the father of the petitioner came into possession of the said land. The total sale consideration agreed to between the parties was Rs. 800/-, out of which an amount of Rs. 600/- was paid on the date of agreement and the balance amount of Rs. 206/- was agreed to be paid after a month at the time of registration of the sale-deed. It is stated that originally, the father of the respondent was a tenant-in-occupation of the land in question and later on he was given patta cer...
Goli Mallikharjuna and Sons Vs. Goli Gangadhara Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)ALT151; (1994)IILLJ161AP
ORDEREaswara Prasad, J.1. The respondents filed an application before the District Munsif, Chirala, Authority under the Shops and Establishments Act, under Section 44 of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act, 1966 (1966 Act, for short) for payment of gratuity, compensation for wrongful deduction of wages etc. 2. A preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the petition, was raised by the petitioner in I.A.No. 1868/91 to frame a preliminary issue relating to the jurisdiction, that is, that after the repeal of 1966 Act by A.P. Shops and Establishments Act, 1988 ('1988 Act', for short) the District Munsif had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter, as the authority appointed under Section 50 of 1988 Act alone is competent and also on the ground that the application under Section 44 of 1966 Act is not maintainable. The application was dismissed holding that the District Munsif is competent under Section 43 of the Act to decide all questions, including determination of jurisdiction...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›