Andhra Pradesh Court December 1995 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.
itc Agro-tech Ltd. and ors. Vs. Registrar of Companies and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALD(Cri)889; [1996]86CompCas170(AP)
V. Rajagopala Reddy, J.1. On the complaint filed by the first respondent, the Special judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad, has taken cognizance of the offence under section 371(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act'), in C.C. No. 63 of 1991 against the petitioners and issued process. This petition is filed to quash the said proceedings. 2. Counsel for the petitioners has raised three contentions : the first contention is that the taking of cognizance of the offence is barred by limitation prescribed under section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code'), the other contentions are that all the offenders liable for the offence are not arrayed as accused in the case, therefore, the prosecution is vitiated; and that the clubbing of offences arising out of two financial years is unlawful. 3. I will take up the first contention which is a precondition for taking cognizance of the offence. It is contended that the offence under sub-section (1) of sec...
Pandian Graphites (India) Ltd. Vs. Lovvuri Lakshmi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT423; [1996]87CompCas323(AP)
Ramesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. This civil revision petition is filed by the petitioner herein under article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The petitioner herein is the first defendant in O.S. No. 63 of 1995, filed by the plaintiff first respondent herein in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Ramachandrapuram. The original plaintiff also filed I.A. No. 1011 of 1995, in the same proceedings. 3. The plaintiff first respondent herein had filed the suit against the petitioner herein claiming various reliefs. It is stated by the plaintiff in her plaint in nutshell that she is entitled for different types of shares, compensation, etc. The prayer made by the plaintiff in the suit reads as follows : '(a) declaring that the plaintiff is entitled to 3,500 shares of Rs. 10 each, out of 5,000 shares issued in lieu of 500 shares of Rs. 100 each by the first defendant; (b) to grant a consequential mandatory injunction directing defendants Nos. 1 to 5 and 7 to issue 3,500 shares of Rs. 10 each to th...
Mathangi Satyanarayana and ors. Etc. Vs. State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALD(Cri)456; 1996CriLJ1809
ORDER1. The respondents in M.C. No. 4/93 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Revenue), Eluru, have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') to quash the proceedings initiated against them under Section 107 of the Code on the complaint dated 21-3-1993 made by the Inspector of Police, Ganapavaram Circle, Ganapavaram. 2. The facts which led to the filing of this petition are as follows : The Inspector of Police Ganapavaram, laid information before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Revenue), Eluru, (for short 'the Magistrate') on 21-3-1993 and sought initiation of action against the petitioners under Section 107 of the Code on the ground that there is imminent threat to peace and security to the public in Apparaopeta due to clashes between two rival groups one of which was headed by the first respondent. Thereupon, the Magistrate registered the case as M. C. No. 4/93 and caused notice dated 22-3-1992 on the petitioners, directing...
i.T.C. Ltd. Vs. Non-pensioners Association and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-1995
Reported in: [1996(73)FLR1736]; (1996)ILLJ1106AP
N.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.:1. This appeal is filed by the Management of the I.T.C. Limited questioning the legality and validity of the order dated April 13, 1994, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P.No. 4094 of 1994 directing the Government to refer the dispute for adjudication under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, hereinafter, 'the Act').2. A few facts which are necessary to dispose of this writ appeal are as follows: That the appellant is the management of the I.T.C. Limited. On October 24, 1986 it announced a scheme known Platinum Jubilee Pension Fund, making it applicable to workmen who are on rolls as on August 24, 1986 and onwards. The members of the first respondent association, who were retired from service prior to August 24, 1986 demanded benefits under the said scheme to them also, but the same were not extended to them, on the ground that the scheme is not applicable to the employees retired from service prior to August 24, 1986. S...
Vasthrala Subba Rao @ Budabukkala Subba Rao Vs. State and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-1995
Reported in: 1999(4)ALD151; 1999(2)ALD(Cri)310
ORDERN.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the accused under Section 374(2) read with Section 383 of the Criminal Procedure Code aggrieved by conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru on 5-1-1995 in Sessions Case No.67 of 1994 convicting the accused for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. A few facts as told by the prosecution, which are necessary to dispose of this appeal, are as follows :Appellant/accused is a native of Chagallu village and residing at Koyyalagudem. He had illicit intimacy with Kagithala Vimala of Koyyalagudem. A few days earlier to the incident, the deceased refused to give money to the accused/appellant and was also not allowing him to come to her. On 25-3-1993 at about 9.00 p.m. while the deceased and her daughter PW1 were returning home and reached the electric pole near Junior College, Accused/appellant came and hacked the dec...
B. Deshmukh Vs. the Chairman and Managing Director, Electronic Corpora ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT814
ORDERG. Bikshapathy, J.1. The Writ Petition is filed seeking directions to the Respondents to re-designate the Petitioner as Technical Officer with proper pay scale instead of continuing as Senior Foreman. The petitioner submits that he was appointed as Scientific Assistant 'C' in the Respondents' Corporation by orders dated 26-5-1977. He was selected by the duly constituted selection committee for the post of Photographer which was advertised in the press vide notification No. 5/76. He was possessing requisite qualifications as notified by the Corporation at the time of appointment. The post of Scientific Assistant 'C' was re-designated as Assistant Scientific Officer/Assistant Technical Officer. He was holding such a post till 18-6-1987. However, the petitioner was promoted with retrospective effect as Senior Foreman with effect from 1-4-1986. The grievance of the petitioner is that the channel of promotion from Scientific Assistant Grade 'C' (re-designated as Assistant Technical Off...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Pallavi Potteries
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-1995
Reported in: [2003]133STC76(AP)
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J. 1. The question in this T.R.C. filed by the State is whether stoneware glazed pipes sold by the respondent come under entry 102 of the First Schedule to the A.P. General Sales Tax Act.2. Though the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is quite unsatisfactory inasmuch as it has not referred to the tests laid down by the decisions of the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. : (1977)2SCC724 and Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax v. G.S. Pai & Co. : [1980]1SCR938 and tested the correctness of the respective view points in the light of the material gathered by the revisional authority, we are not inclined to interefere with the ultimate conclusion reached by the Tribunal.3. The Tribunal merely followed its earlier decision in T.A. Nos. 798 of 1977, 63 and 66 of 1978 dated June 29, 1978. That decision was rendered prior to the aforementioned judgment of the Supreme Court in G.S. Pai & Company's case : [1980]1SCR938 . The Tribunal itself had ...
Nookala Ramesh Reddy Vs. Gudipudi Rangarao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-1995
Reported in: 1996(3)ALT501
ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J.1. The point involved in this revision is whether the document in question is a bond or a promissory note. The learned District Munsif held that it is a bond as it is attested by two witnesses and also the vital words 'payable to or your order' are missing in the said document. Against that order, the defendant has filed the present-revision petition.2. The main contention of the petitioner is that merely because the document does not mention the words 'payable to or your order' it does not cease to be a promissory note. In support of his contention he relied on a decision in M. Akbar Khan v. Attar-Singh, AIR 1936 P.C. 171. In that case, the Privy Council while considering whether a document is merely a receipt or a promissory note held as follows:'That the document was not a promissory note but was merely a receipt containing the terms on which the amount was to be refunded. Being primarily a receipt even if coupled with the promise to pay, it was not a promissory...
Eswaramma and ors. Vs. G. Peddathippeswamy and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-1995
Reported in: II(1996)DMC417
V. Rajagopala Reddy, J.1. Though the 1st respondent was served notice none appeared for him. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor. This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order of the learned Magistrate passed in the M.C. No. 16/94 dismissing the same on the ground that the Court has no jurisdiction. The order is not a speaking order. On this ground itself the order is liable to be set aside.2. Section 126 of the Criminal Procedure Code makes it clear that the proceedings under the said section can be taken against person, in any District. Where the wife of the husband resides, or the husband last resided with his wife. The concerned District is, therefore, the area of jurisdiction. It is not necessary that the parties should have resided within his jurisdiction.3. Admittedly the parties belong to Ananthapur District. The petitioners who are the wife and children of the 1 st respondent can therefore, file a petition for maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure...
Smt. Saraswati Bai Vs. Acharya Ved Bhushan
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)ALT887
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. Petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No. 1407 of 1986 on the file of the VII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.2. In this Tr.C.M.P., she seeks transfer of O.S.No.1407 of 1986 pending on the file of the VII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad to any other Court of competent jurisdiction for disposal on merits.3. This petition is filed at a stage when the entire evidence on behalf of both sides was adduced and arguments were also advanced on behalf of the plaintiff in the said suit, when the matter was posted for advancing the arguments on behalf of the defendant on 28-6-1995 finally, the Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner was not ready to proceed with the case on the said date, i.e., on 28-6-1995, the Court was requested to adjourn the case up to 30-6-1995 and again on an application filed by the petitioner herein under Order 17 Rule 1 of C.P.C. on 30-6-1995, the case was adjourned on 6-7-1995 enabling the petitioner's counsel to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »