Andhra Pradesh Court March 1995 Judgments

Central Warehousing Corporation, Rep. by Its Managing Director and anr ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(1)ALT76

B. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. The respondents in the writ petition are the appellants herein. The appeal is preferred against the orders of the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 8325 of 1986 setting aside the orders passed by the 2nd appellant by which the respondent who is the employee of the appellants and who was promoted from the post of Superintendent to that of Storage and Inspection Officer and was put on probation was served with an order dated 25-6-1986 resulting in the reversion of the respondent to the lower post of Superintendent. By reason of stay, pending writ petition and by reason of subsequent allowing of the writ petition, the respondent is still continuing in the post of Storage and Inspection Officer. The respondent was initially appointed in the service of the 1st respondent-Central Warehousing Corporation as Junior Technical Assistant with effect from 1-9-1969 and was further promoted as Superintendent with effect from 30-6-1978. By proceedings dated 25-4-1984, he was p...

Nagarjuna Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. M. Narasimha Murthy and A ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. This is a petition filed by M/s. Nagarjuna Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Nagarjuna Hills, Hyderabad for granting leave to them to prefer an appeal against the order of the District Forum, Medak passed in O.P. No. 81/94 and also for impleading them as party/respondent No. 2 in O.P. 81 /94. 2. The question of impleading them as party to the O.P. does not arise, because the O.P. was already disposed of on 17.8.1994. 3. The only question therefore is whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of leave to prefer an appeal against the order in O.P. 81 /94. 4. In order to decide whether the petitioner is entitled for leave or not, it is necessary to narrate few facts. 5. In the complaint O.P. 81 /94 filed by the first respondent, it was stated that he applied for allotment of shares of Nagarjuna Fertilisers and Chemicals Ltd., Hyderabad. The shares were allotted to him and were issued to him with distinctive numbers. After allotment and receipt of th...

Billa Linga Reddy Vs. the Revenue Divisional Officer and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1996AP3; 1995(1)ALT853

ORDERThis writ petition seeks a relief to pay the compensation in accordance with the judgment and decree rendered on 24-12-1983 in 0. P. No. 280 of 1980 on the file of subordinate Judge, Karimnagar.2. A preliminary objection is projected by the learned Government Pleader on the ground that when a judgment and decree has been rendered by the civil Court, the same has to be executed in the Civil Court as provided by several Rules under Order 21, C.P.C. and that this writ petition is not maintainable. May be the said objection is tenable so far as the ordinary suits are concerned. But, in a case concerning deprivation of a person's property, it can be done only by due process of law and not otherwise. After the 44th Constitution Amendment Act, 1978, which came into force from 20-6-1979, the said fundamental right was transformed as a constitutional guarantee under Art. 300-A of the Indian Constitution. The lands, in the instant case, were acquired in the year 1977 by issuing a notificati...

Savani Transport Ltd. and Others Vs. Potla Madhava Rao

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The respondent in this appeal P. Madhava Rao got a consignment of 105 cases brown colour ceramic glazed tiles worth Rs. 26,107.20 Ps booked at Delhi to be delivered to him at Khammam on 10.4.1993 and paid the necessary charges to Savani Transport Branch Office at Delhi i.e. the second opposite party. The complainant was informed by the opposite party No. 3 that the consignment reached Khamam on 26.4.1993. When the complainant went to the office of the opposite party No. 3, he found that the tiles were broken and out of 13 boxes six boxes were broken which were visible and the remaining 7 boxes were also damaged. As there was no proper response from the opposite party No. 3 he filed a complaint claiming compensaion of Rs. 26,107.20 Ps. and a further sum of Rs. 4300/- by way of compensation with interest at 24%. 2. Immediately after filing of the complaint, a Commissioner was appointed to assess the damage caused the tiles. The Commissioner submitted a...

Post Master, Keshavgiri and Others Vs. Cor. S.P. Illangovan

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, Hyderabad in C.D. 799/94, whereby it directed the opposite parties i.e; (1) Postmaster, Keshavgiri Post Officer, Hydera bad (2) Sr. Superintendent of Posts (SE), Hyderabad, (3) The Sr. Superintendent of Posts (South), Bombay and (4) The Postmaster, Nariman Point Post Office, Bombay to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs. 5000/- and costs of Rs. 500/-, this appeal is preferred. 2. The respondent herein sent by registered post a cover from Hyderabad to M/s. Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd. for short 1CICI for transfer of shares which were purchased by him. The said letter did not reach the ICICI. On account of the failure of the opposite parties to deliver the letter, the complainant was put to lot of inconvenience and expenditure to go to Bombay and get the duplicate certificates issued. Alleging that due to the negligence of the opposite parties in not delivering the letter...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. B. Chinnaiah and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: (1995)127CTR(AP)467; [1995]214ITR368(AP)

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. 1. In this batch of cases, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following two questions are referred to this court for opinion : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that 40 per cent. of the incentive bonus is an allowance of the nature mentioned under section 10(14) and exempting the same under that provision (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal that the incentive bonus included in allowance either to the extent proved or reasonably at 40 per cent. of the incentive bonus, which is exempt under section 10(14), is based on any material available on record ?' 2. To answer the above questions, it may be useful to refer to the facts in one of the cases. We propose to refer to the facts as stated in the statement of case in Revision Case No. 30 of 1991. The assessee was the Development ...

Parchuri Rajya Lakshmi Vs. Parchuri Viswa Sankara Prasad

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: I(1995)DMC630

P.L.N. Sarma, J.1. In this Civil Revision Petition, the petitioner questions the order of the learned Subordinate Judge at Machilipatnam in LA. No. 564 of 1985 in O.P. No. 127 of 1984 dated 12-3-1991.2. The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. The respondent filed the said O.P. No. 127 of 1984 for restitution of conjugal rights and the petitioner herein filed LA. No. 564 of 1985 for interim maintenance and expenses to prosecute and defend, in the said O.P. The learned Subordinate Judge allowed the said LA. granting the petitioner herein maintenance at Rs. 150/- per month instead of Rs. 200/- per month as claimed by her and also Rs. 500/- towards legal expenses. The learned Subordinate Judge granted to said interim maintenance only from 1-12-1990, even though the said LA. was filed in February, 1985. In this C.R.P., the petitioner contends that she is entitled to grant of interim maintenance from the date of the filing of the I.A. i.e., from February, 1985. She also contends that s...

i. T. C. Classic Finance and Services Vs. Commissioner of Commercial T ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(1)ALT563

M.N. Rao, J. 1. In this batch of six cases, the common question for consideration concern the application of section 5-E of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to the hire transaction of M/s. I.T.C. Classic Finance and Services Ltd., Secunderabad - the appellant in Spl. Appeal No. 1 of 1995 and the petitioner in the other five write petitions. We are, therefore, inclined to dispose of all the six cases by this common judgment. 2. M/s. Classic Finance and Services Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') is a limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, with its registered office at 5/2, Russel Street and branch office at No. 31, Sarojini Devi Road, Secunderabad. The assessee is registered dealer under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act. It ia a finance company. It hires machinery, plant and equipment to different parties for rent. It purchases goods according to the specificatio...

Mcdowell and Company Limited Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [2003]133STC238(AP)

K.M. Agarwal, Ag. C.J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties this writ petition is hereby finally disposed of.2. It appears for the months of June and July, 1994, there was a provisional assessment against the petitioner under Section 15 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, and an additional tax liability of Rs. 70,00,000 was created against the petitioner. The petitioner filed appeal along with an application for stay. The stay application was rejected. A revision petition filed against that was also rejected. Under these circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner-company did not dispute that the first respondent was entitled to recover the amount of Rs. 70,00,000 as per the provisional assessment under Section 15 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. What he argued was that in execution of the provisional assessment order, the first respondent first issued a garnishee order under Section ...

Vidyaranya Education Society, Koppolu, Prakasam District Vs. Director ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1995AP295; 1995(2)ALT197

ORDER1. The question that arises in thisWrit Petition is whether the proceedings ofthe 1st respondent herein in L.Dis. No.767/D2-2/93 dated 6-9-1993 granting permission to open Class VIII in Telugu mediumduring 1993-94 without aid in respect of the3rd respondent-school at Koppolu is validand whether the petitioner herein can question the same.2. The petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act with Registration No. 504/92. It applied on 27-2-1993 to the RegionalJoint Director of School Education, Guntur for permission to start a High School under the name of Sri Vidya-ranya High School at Koppolu village in Ongoledistrict and the 1st respondent i.e., the Director of School Education, Andhra Pra-desh, granted permission in his proceedings L.Dis. No. 600/D2-2/93 dated 14-5-1993 to open Classes Vlth to VIIIth (TM) during the year 1993-94 without aid in respect of Sri Vidyaranya High School, Koppolu. It is the case of the petitioner that coming to know of its int...