Andhra Pradesh Court August 1994 Judgments

Annabathuni Sravana Kumar and anr. Vs. Puvvada Suvarnalatha

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(3)ALT306

A. Gopal Rao, J.1. Defendants 2 and 3, who are the legal representatives of the 1st defendant, in O.S. No. 688/1983 on the file of I Additional District Munsif Court, Tenali, are the appellants in this second appeal. Second plaintiff in the suit is the respondent-herein. Plaintiffs filed the suit for mandatory injunction to demolish the rice mill and the mill building constructed in plot D and also for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants and their men from operating or working the rice mill in plot D till the same is demolished. Case of the plaintiffs is that the second plaintiff is the daughter of the first plaintiff and they are the owners of the terraced building shown in plot P in the plaint plan, wherein they are residing. First defendant purchased plot D on the western side of plot P. There is a three yards' width lane for the use of plaintiffs and other neighbourers to go to the street on the northern side. There was a rice mill in the site, which is on the west of t...

Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [1999]112STC556(AP)

ORDER1. These four tax revision cases are filed by the Sirpur Paper Mills Limited, Hyderabad. They relate to different assessment years. The only question urged in these four tax revision cases is 'whether the stamp charges incurred by the assessee by affixing stamps on the hundis form part of the turnover ?' 2. This point is found against the assessee by a judgment of division bench of this Court in Tax Revision Case Nos. 238, 240 and 242 of ', 983, dated February 7, 1989 (Reported at page 555 supra). 3. Following that judgment, the tax revision cases are dismissed. No costs. 4. Petitions dismissed....

The United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Etnoori Yadagiri Goud a ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(1)ALT218

ORDERB.S. Raikote, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the United India Insurance Company Limited, Adilabad, the first respondent in O.P. No. 127of 1986 on the file of Addl. District Judge, Adilabad (Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, Adilabad) against the Judgment and Award dated 10-3-1988 passed in O.P. No. 127 of 1986. Though the learned Addl. District Judge disposed of O.P. No. 126 and 127 of 1986 by a common Judgment, now we are concerned with the Judgment and Award in so far as it pertains to O.P. No. 127 of 1986.2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant Mr. S. Hanumaiah, Seriously contested the Judgment and Award in so far as it fixes the liability on the appellant/Insurance Company contending that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, no liability could have been fixed on the appellant.3. In order to appreciate the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant, a few facts of this case would be necessary. The deceased Vijaya Kumar Goud, havi...

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Etnoori Yadagiri Goud and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995ACJ600

B.S. Raikote, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Adilabad, the first respondent in O.P. No. 127 of 1986 on the file of Addl. District Judge, Adilabad (Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Adilabad) against the judgment and award dated 10.3.1988 passed in O.P. No. 127 of 1986. Though the learned Addl. District Judge disposed of O.P. Nos. 126 and 127 of 1986 by a common judgment, now we are concerned with the judgment and award insofar as it pertains to O.P. No. 127 of 1986.2. The learned Counsel appealing for the appellant, Mr. S. Hanumaiah, seriously contested the judgment and award insofar as it fixes the liability on the appellant insurance company contending that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, no liability could have been fixed on the appellant.3. In order to appreciate the arguments of the learned Counsel for the appellant, a few facts of this case would be necessary. The deceased Vijaya Kumar Goud, having taken the motor...

Chakiri Saidulu and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994CriLJ3782

M.N. Rao, J.1. A1 to A4 in SC No. 287 of 1992 on the file of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, are the appellants. They were convicted by the learned Judge for the offence under section 302 IPC and each of them was sentenced to imprisonment for life. 2. Eight accused were tried by the learned Sessions Judge in connection with the murder of one Addanki Katamaraju on 21-1-1991 at about 10.00 a.m., at the bus-stand centre in Mutyalampadu village. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that there were factions among the 'Yadavas' in the village of Mutyalampadu. The deceased Katamaraju was the leader of one faction and A5 is the leader of the opposite faction - both belonging to Yadava caste. The deceased was the supporter of Congress partly while the accused are the followers of Telugu Desam Party. On 21-1-1991, at about 10.00 a.m., the deceased-Katamaraju, after taking tea in the hotel of one Chavali Nagalaxmamma, P.W. 5, was sitting at the bus-stand centre. A1 to A4 and some othe...

S. Smmaiah and ors. Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board and ors ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994CriLJ3830

P.L.N. Sarma, J.1. This matter has been placed before us on Office note as to the maintainability of the Letters Patent Appeal sought to be filed by the appellants. 2. The relevant facts are as follows : Appellants filed Writ Petition No. 16523 of 1991 under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to implement the settlement arrived at dated 26-10-1991 entered into by the respondents with the Union under S. 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Officer-cum-Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Warangal. The said writ petition was disposed of by a learned single Judge of this Court on 20-4-1992 in the following terms : 'In view of the above, there will be a direction that the respondents shall consider the claims of the petitioners for appointment as Helpers in terms of the Settlement dated 26-10-1991 which the respondents had entered into with the Trade Union representing the petitioners. I make it absolutely clear that I am not pronouncing up...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nizam Sugar Factory Ltd.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [1995]216ITR320(AP)

1. In this I. T. C. filed by the Revenue under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the short question that arises for consideration is whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has committed an error of law in not referring the following question, i.e., question No. 1 to this court for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleting the disallowance of Rs. 24,15,515 representing expenditure in respect of social overheads ?' 2. Out of the questions which were sought to be referred the second question concerned was already referred to the High Court by the Tribunal. 3. In computing the income of the assessee, the Assessing Officer disallowed an expenditure of Rs. 24,15,515 representing the expenditure in respect of social overheads. However, on appeal by the assessee, the appellate authority allowed the expenditure. This order...

Harsharanjit Singh Vs. Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd. and or ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(3)ALT270; (1995)IILLJ488AP

Lingaraja Rath, J.1. The writ petitioner, who is the appellant, assails the judgment of the learned Single Judge refusing to interfere with his transfer from the post of Senior Vigilance Officer in the Vigilance Department of the first respondent to its marketing Department in the regional office at Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, as Deputy Marketing Manager. The submission urged by the appellant before the learned single Judge that he having been appointed to the post of Assistant Vigilance Officer and thereafter promoted as vigilance Officer an Senior Vigilance Officer, could not be shifted from the Vigilance Department was negatived in the judgment under appeal because of Rule 4 of the Fertilizer Corporation of India Limited Employees' (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') requiring an employee to serve the Corporation in its business in such capacity and at such places as he may, from time to time be directed. 2. The short facts relating t...

S.V. Sampath Kumar Vs. Rampal Attal

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. Aggrieved by the order of the dismissal of the complaint by the District Forum in C.D. No. 717/92, this appeal is preferred by the complainant. 2. His case is that he is an investor and the Opposite Party a share broker. The complainant used to purchase and sell the shares of various companies through the Opposite Party and he used to give written instructions to the Opposite Party for that purpose. On 7.4.1992 on his instructions, the Opposite Party purchased 50 shares of Reliance Industries at the rate of Rs. 345-20 Ps per share. The complainant paid a sum of Rs. 16,360/- and was due in a sum of Rs. 900/-to the Opposite Party. When the complainant offered to pay the balance of Rs. 900/- and requested O.P. to deliver 50 shares, he was informed by the Opposite Party that on 25.3.1992 the complainant had placed an order with him for purchase of 100 shares of Reliance Industries for which the complainant is due Rs. 39590/-. Unless that amount was paid,...