Andhra Pradesh Court November 1996 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.
Godavari Oil Distributors Vs. Joint Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-1996
Reported in: 1999(3)ALT187
ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. This writ petition raises a very important point with regard to the applicability of A.R Petroleum Products Order, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the State Order) which was promulgated in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3(1) of the Essential Commodities Act 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), to a person like the petitioner, who is carrying on business in Kerosene as a parallel marketeer under the provisions of Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Ceiling Price) Order, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Central Order), which is an Order promulgated by the Central Government in exercise of the powers contained under Section 3 of the Act.2. The petitioner is a wholesale distributor of Kerosene purchased from Vishaka Petroleum Products Private Limited under the parallel marketing system for East Godavari. Proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner in Cr. No. 4/ VC-KDA/95 by the Inspector of Police, Vigilance Cell, Ci...
Telangana Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. (Rotor Unit) Rep. by Its Com ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALD(Cri)346; 1997(1)ALT558
ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. The important question for consideration which arises in this case is regarding the power of the Government to entertain the appeal Under Section 6-C of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the order passed by the Collector Under Section 6-A of the Act for the violation of the provisions contained under Textiles (Control) Order, 1986.2. The petitioner is running a spinning mill at Sadasiva Pet which was commissioned in the year 1984. Returns have to be submitted quarterly. In so far as the cotton yarn of hosiery variety is concerned, there is some exemption. Nevertheless, returns have to be submitted. But in the instant case, there was some delay. How the delay is explained is a question for consideration by the authorities. But, proceedings were initiated Under Section 6-A of the Act pursuant to the inspection and search of the mill premises of the petitioner by the concerned Inspector of Police, Vigilance Cel...
President, Buchireddipalem Co-operative Rural Bank Limited Vs. D. Siva ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)ALT724
B.S.A. Swamy, J.1. In this appeal we are called upon to decide whether the employee of a Co-operative Rural Bank (a Primary Society under the provisions of A.P. Cooperative Societies Act hereinafter called 'the Act') has to retire on attaining the age of superannuation as prescribed under the A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules (hereinafter called 'the Rules') and the bye-laws of the society or he is entitled to be continued in service upto the age of 60 years claiming protection under Section 40(3) of A.P. Shops and Establishments Act (hereinafter called 'the Shops Act').2. The facts that are necessary for disposal of this writ appeal are as follows:-The appellant-bank dismissed the respondent from service w.e.f. 1-9-1983 by its order dt. 31-8-1983 on the ground that the respondent while working as Secretary of the society committed grave financial irregularities and also embezzled the funds of the society. Aggrieved by the said orders he filed an appeal before the Competent Authority u...
K. Santha Kumari and Another Etc. Vs. Sri Krishnadave Raya University ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-1996
Reported in: AIR1997AP72; 1997(2)ALT418
ORDER1. Whether the sterio type and verbatim answers in the answer scripts of the students would constitute malpractice/ unfair means is the issue that calls for consideration in these Writ Petitioner. Since the common questions are involved in all these cases, they are decided jointly.2. The petitioners are the students of B.Sc., Final Year degree. They studied the degree course at S.J.S. Degree College, Kurnool affiliated to Sri Krishnadeva Raya University, Ananthapur, the 1st respondent herein. The college imparts the course in English and Telugu medium. The petitioners herein belong to both the media. The Final Year B.Sc., Degree examinations were held from 18-4-1996 and Examination Centre in respect of the petitioners was fixed in (heir own College i.e. S.J.S. Degree College forWomen, Kurnool. All the petitioners wrote the examinations and the results were announced in the newspaper on 4-7-1996. They were declared passed. However, when they went to the College for taking the memo ...
Rajyalakshmi Cotton and Ginning Mills, Rep. by Its Partner, Sivaraju V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-1996
Reported in: 1996(4)ALT702
ORDERK.B. Siddappa, J.1. C.R.P. No. 4007/92 is filed against the order passed in I.A.No. 1399/92 in O.S. No. 75/90. C.R.P.No. 4008/92 is filed against the order passed in LA. No. 1830/92 in O.S.No. 75/90.2. I.A.No. 1399/92 was filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay of 22 days in filing the petition under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. LA. No. 1830/92 was filed to set-aside the ex parte decree.3. As common questions of law arise in these two Revisions, they are disposed of by a common order.4. Plaintiff is the revision petitioner in both the Revisions. The Suit was filed by the plaintiff claiming Rs. 7,00,930/- as compensation for loss of cotton said to have been sustained by them on account of fire accident dated 28-6-1989. In the Suit several adjournments were given for the defendants to file written statement. As a last chance the Court granted time on condition of paying Rs. 25/- to the plaintiff as costs and posted the Suit for compliance of conditions on 20-8-1992. O...
Komanduri Bhanumathi and ors. Vs. the Guntur Municipal Council, Rep. b ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-1996
Reported in: 1996(4)ALT730
ORDERK.B. Siddappa, J.1. This Revision is filed against the order passed in O.S. No. 262/89 on the file of Additional Subordinate Judge, Guntur.2. The Suit is filed by 19 plaintiffs for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their possession and enjoyment of schedule of property, consisting of plots 1 to 19. The plaintiffs valued the Suit and paid the Court Fee under Section 26(c) of A.P. Court Fees & Suits Valuation Act. The Inspection Staff took objection and issued a check slip stating that the Court Fees cannot be paid under Section 26(c) of the Act on the ground that though single Suit is filed, the reliefs sought are individual in respect of plots 1 to 19. Therefore, the plaintiffs have to pay Court Fee on each relief.3. It was contended on behalf of the plaintiffs that common questions of law and factarise and as such the plaintiffs are right in joining in one suit and that the Court Fee paid is proper. It is further submitted that under Section ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prasad Film Laboratories P. Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-1996
Reported in: (1997)142CTR(AP)355; [1997]225ITR348(AP)
T.N.C. Rangarajan, J.1. The admitted facts stated in this case are as follows : The assessee is a company engaged in the business of printing and processing of cinematographic films. The Appellate Tribunal has found that the actual process carried out by the company was to develop exposed cinematographic film and make positive prints which are ready for exhibition. In the proceedings for the assessment year 1984-85 corresponding to the previous year ended on June 30, 1983, the assessee did not claim any investment allowance. The assessment was declared as 'N. A.' (not assessable) determining the net loss at Rs. 94,175 and carrying forward unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 4,65,918. The assessee thereafter filed an application for rectifying the assessment stating that by inadvertence it had omitted to claim investment allowance on electrical installations, voltage stabilisers, and air-conditioning plant used in the said business of developing and processing the cinematographic film and it...
M. Raja Rao Vs. Govt. of A.P., Rep. by Its Secretary, Revenue Dept. an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)ALT812
N.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.1. The point for consideration in this writ appeal is whether the person exhibiting entertainment shows is liable to pay entertainment tax in spite of he being prevented due to vis-major or by illegal interference by the State or for the reasons beyond licencee's control to admit the persons to entertainment on payment ?2. In order to answer the above question it is appropriate to refer to some of the facts: The appellant constructed a temporary cinema theatre under the name and style 'Royal Touring Talkies' at Jangareddigudem, West Godavari District. He entered into an agreement under Section 5 of the A.P. Entertainment Tax Act hereinafter referred to as the Tax Act for payment of entertainment tax with the authorities constituted under the said Act. Pursuant to the agreement he paid tax up to 5-3-1978. When he was exhibiting cinemas one Mr. K. Krishnamurthy constructed a permanent cinema theatre called Lakshmi talkies at jangareddigudem which is at a distance of...
M. Sanjeeva Reddy and ors. Vs. State Convenor, Common Entrance Test, 1 ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALT303
S. Parvatha Rao, J.1. The relief sought in this batch of writ petitions depends on the validity of the Special Entrance Test conducted on 24-12-1995 exclusively for all the students who studied in unrecognized private Teacher Training Institutes during the years 1983-84 and 1984-85 to permit those successful in the said test to undergo a six month crash course in Government Teacher Training Institutes as per the decision taken by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in G.O.Ms. No. 170, Education (S.S.E.) Department dated 9-5-1989.2. The validity of this test and the decision taken by the Government under that G.O. has to be tested on the basis of the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions ((Regulation of Admissions into Teacher Training Course through Common Entrance Test) Rules, 1990 (for short 'the 1990 Rules) and the earlier Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Admission of Students into Teacher Training Institutions) Rules, 1986 (for short 'the 1986 Rules'), both made under the An...
N. Raghotham Rao (Died) Per L.R. and anr. Vs. M.C.H., Rep. by Its Spl. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-1996
Reported in: 1996(4)ALT1126
ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against an order refusing amendment of the plaint so as to seek the relief of declaration of title in respect of the suit schedule land which is described as a passage. The suit was filed for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant-Municipal Corporation from interfering with the possession of the suit schedule land shown in yellow colour in the plan. The plaintiffs claimed the same as being an integral part of their building bearing Municipal Nos. 4-1-11/D/3, 4-1-11/D/4 and 4-1-11/D/5 situate at Tilak Road, Hyderabad. It is the contention of the defendant-Corporation that the vendors of the plaintiffs had no right to sell the suit-schedule land describing it as common passage meant for their exclusive use. It is the contention of the Corporation that the land in question is part of the road set apart as such in the approved lay-out. It is also stated that the lay-out was sanctioned subject to the condition of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »