Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.
Jawahar Brothers, GraIn Merchants and Commission Agent, Rep. by Its Pa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-1995
Reported in: 1995(2)ALT820
ORDERT.N.C. Rangarajan, J.1. This writ petition challenges the seizure of the essential commodities held by the petitioner.2. The admitted facts are that the petitioner is a firm having licence under the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Dealers' (Licensing and Distribution) Order, 1982 to carry on business at premises No. 15-9-48, Maharajgunj, Hyderabad. In the same premises, another firm Nanakram Hanuthram has also been licenced to carry on business. On 13-7-1995 at 12.15 p.m. the Inspector of Vigilance visited the premises and searched the same. Sri Devender Kumar, who was a partner of both the firms produced the records viz., stock registers, bill books, purchase bills etc., as well as the licences. The Inspector checked the documents and took an inventory of the stock. According to the panchanama, there was a slight variation which was within the permissible limits taking each firm as a separate entity. He also found that 215 bags of green peas under invoice dated 1-7-1995 rece...
Ari Nageswara Rao Vs. the District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)ALT399
ORDERB.S.A. Swamy, J.1. It is not in dispute that possession of the land in question was taken way back in April, 1992 even before issuance of the Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act') for formation of a channel. It is also not in dispute that till date, the authorities have not issued the 4(1) Notification. With the result the petitioner was not only deprived of his valuable property, but also the compensation payable to him for the last three years. Though the petitioner got a legal notice issued on 29-1-1994, the 2nd Respondent except informing the Lawyer that no funds are available for payment of compensation for the lands acquired by the Division for the last three years and that the amount payable to the petitioner will be deposited with the 3rd Respondent on receipt of the funds in his letter No. Al/B-42, 2067 dated 15-2-1994, has not taken any steps to secure necessary funds from the authority concerned. This is not the first of its k...
Jitendra Palnitker Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)ALD80; 1995(2)APLJ282; 1996CriLJ105; 1995(2)LS160
ORDER1. This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for release of Hero Honda Motor Cycle bearing R.T.O. Registration No. A.P. 9C 2803 in favour of the petitioner herein. 2. In this matter, a small but very interesting point has been agitated before this Court for consideration. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted at the Bar that the offence against the petitioner under the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act and Andhra Pradesh Excise Act is yet to be proved. The motor cycle in question is exposed to the atmosphere condition and it is lying without any care being taken. Thus, at the end of trial even if the accused is acquitted, the motor cycle will lose its value and therefore prayed for the interim custody of the said vehicle. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State submitted at the Bar that the motor cycle is liable to be confiscated and the confiscation is to be done by the Prohibition and Excise Officials. The Magistrate has no jurisdictio...
Major Thakur Singh Kaundal Vs. Military Secretary, Army Headquarters a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT337
ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J. 1. This writ petition is filed for a direction to the respondents not to give effect to the order of transfer by declaring the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India. 2. The petitioner was working as Major in the Army (Ministry of Defence). The Government of India sanctioned a post of Public Relation Officer at Hyderabad. The petitioner was posted on 26-8-1993 as Public Relation Officer at Hyderabad. The petitioner was selected by a duly constituted selection panel consisting of Principal Information Officer, Press Information Bureau, New Delhi, Member from Defence Ministry and Director of Public Relations (Defence), New Delhi. Pursuant to his appointment as a Public Relation Officer, he assumed charge on 10-10-1993 at Hyderabad. The petitioner was provided with the office accommodation after a lapse of six months. From the date of assuming office as Public Relation Officer, he was discharging his duties to the enti...
Kakarla Nageswara Rao and ors. Vs. Government of A.P. Rep. by Its Secr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)ALT164
ORDERD. Reddeppa Reddy, J.1. These four writ petitions arise under the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959 (for short 'the Regulation') as amended from time to time. It would be convenient to dispose them of together since common questions arise in all the matters.2. The material facts are: All the petitioners are non-tribals. They purchased lands situated in the Agency tracts from non-tribals through sale deeds registered in the year 1978. On complaints filed by the Special Deputy Tahsildar, Tribal Welfare No. 1, Eluru, the third respondent viz., the Agency Divisional Officer-cwm-Special Deputy Collector, Kota Ramachandrapuram, West Godavari District, Eluru, initiated proceedings for ejectment of the petitioners under Section 3(2) a) of the Regulation. After due enquiry, he passed orders of ejectment on 301 September, 1982. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred appeals to the second respondent viz., the Agent to the Government, West Godavari Distri...
The Managing Director, Apsrtc Vs. Laghshetty Leelavathi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)ALT79
ORDERS. Parvatha Rao, J.1. We do not find any sufficient cause for condoning the delay of 197 days in filing this appeal. Both in the affidavit filed in support of this C.M.P. for condoning the delay as well as in the reply affidavit dated 24-7-1995 filed by the Senior Law Officer of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, it is admitted that certified copies of the judgment and the award of the learned District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy dated 7-2-1994 in O.P.No. 642 of 1992 were received on 14-6-1994 and that the same were sent to the Law Department of the Corporation on 26-7-1994 i.e., nearly six weeks after they were received. It is stated that the file was marked to the standing counsel by the Law Department on 29-7-1994 and that the standing counsel returned the file along with the draft grounds .only on 14-3-1995. There is nothing to substantiate this. No correspondence is referred to in the affidavits nor any copies of the same filed to establish when the papers we...
Bikkasani Satyanarayana Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT(Cri)237; 1996CriLJ1435
1. This Criminal Revision Case arises out of the dismissal of Criminal Appeal No. 93 of 1991 by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Khammam confirming the conviction recorded and sentence imposed against the petitioner herein by the Court of Additional First Class Magistrate, Kothagudem in C.C. No. 427 of 1989. 2. The petitioner is the sole accused. He was prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 34(a) and (b) of the A.P. Excise Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the conviction recorded by the Court of Magistrate which was confirmed by the Court of Sessions is unsustainable for the reason that no independent evidence has been adduced and that the panchayatdars P.Ws. 1 and 2 did not support the case of the prosecution. The conviction was based on the evidence of P.Ws. 3 and 4 who are the Sub-Inspector of Excise and Circle Inspector of Excise. Ganja was seized from the possession of the petitioner on 20-2-1988. P.Ws. 1 and 2 are the madiators. P.W. 1 i...
State Bank of India, Industrial Area Branch, Rep. by Its Chief Manager ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-1995
Reported in: 1995(2)ALT675
ORDERA. Gopal Rao, J.1. The petitioner herein, the State Bank of India, Industrial Area Branch, Nacharam, filed an application O. A. Diary No. 432/95 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Bangalore (camp at Hyderabad) for recovery of a debt under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Rule 4 of the Rules framed under the Act prescribed a format of the application containing the particulars to be given by the applicant and also the details of the requisite documents to be enclosed along with the application. The petitioner in compliance with this rule filed an application in the prescribed format giving all the details and also enclosing the necessary documents including the statement of account based on which the claim is made by the petitioner. The Registry of the Debts Recovery Tribunal raised an objection without giving any details stating that the petitioner should give the break up figures of the princi...
State of Andhra Pradesh and anr. Vs. P.L. Raju and Company
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-21-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT144; 1996(2)ARBLR629(AP)
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J. 1. The C.M.A. and the C.R.P. are filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh against the common judgment in O.S. No. 830 of 1985 and O.P. 313 of 1985 on the file of the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad respectively, O.S. No. 830/85 was filed by the respondent under Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act to make the Award dated 31.5.1985 a Rule of the Court and to pass a decree in terms thereof. O.P. 313/85 was filed by the appellants under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act to set aside the Award. The suit was decreed and the Government was directed to pay the amount awarded by the arbitrator together with interest at 18% per annum from the date of reference till the date of realisation. O.P. No. 313/88 was dismissed. 2. The respondent is a contractor. The contract was to construct a high-level causeway across Alair river at KM 31/4-6 of Torruru-Voligonda road. Nalgonda district. The work was awarded to him pursuant to the acceptance of the r...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Abhirami Cotton Mills (P) Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-21-1995
Reported in: [1996]220ITR84(AP)
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. 1. These two cases relate to the same assessee, R. C. No. 118 of 1987, arises out of the order of assessment for the asst. yr. 1980-81 and R. C. No. 35 of 1988 relates to the asst. yr. 1981-82. In these cases, at the instance of the Revenue, the following questions of law are referred to this Court for opinion under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961. In RC No. 118 of 1987, the following question is referred to this Court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in directing the grant of relief under s. 80J even though no separate set of accounts were maintained ?' In RC No. 35 of 1988 the following two questions are referred to this Court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in directing the grant of relief under s. 80J even though no separate set of accounts were maintained and profits of the new unit could not be clearly determined (2) Whether, on the facts and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »