Andhra Pradesh Court December 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.
Sri Sangameshwara Swamy Temple, Rep. by Its Chairman and ors. Vs. the ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALT779
Krishna Saran Shrivastav, J.1. Commonality of questions of law and similarity of facts incline me to dispose of these eight revisions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by this common judgment.2. It is no longer in dispute before me that the 1st petitioner-temple is the owner of agricultural lands in question and the remaining petitioners have been inducted as lessees (for short 'second lessees') in respect of different extents of agricultural lands out of the agricultural lands in question in pursuance of the auction held by the 1st petitioner-temple on 12-3-1992 while the 1st respondent is the Principal District Munsif, the second respondent is the Tenancy Appellate Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge and the remaining respondents claim themselves to be the lessees (for short 'first lessees') in respect of the same extents of agricultural lands out of the agricultural lands in question for many years from before 12-3-1992, that is to say, the date on which the leasehold...
Hitech (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors. Tico Machines (P) ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-1996
Reported in: (1997)143CTR(AP)305
SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, J. :Common questions of law are urged in these writ petitions, so they are heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. For appreciating the facts which give rise to the questions referred to hereunder it will be enough to refer to the fact in WP No. 7516 of 1992 which are representative of the facts in the other writ petitions.2. The petitioners are challenging the constitutional validity of s. 43B and s. 36(1)(va) of the IT Act, 1961, in so far as they provide for disallowance of the employers contribution to provident fund, contribution to the employees State insurance fund and the payment of employees contribution to the provident fund and contribution to the employees State insurance fund when the same are paid after the due dates in the respective Acts.3. The petitioner is a private limited company. It is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of electronic connectors for the defence sector and it is registered as a small scal...
Swastik Coaters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deepak Brothers and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALD(Cri)370; 1997(1)ALT(Cri)371; [1997]89CompCas564(AP); 1997CriLJ1942
1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 3-8-1994 passed by the XI Metropolitan Magistrate at Secunderabad on his file in C.C. No. 409 of 1992. By the impugned order the accused Nos. 1 and 2 have been acquitted. The appellant M/s. Swastik Coaters Private Limited is the original complainant and M/s. Deepak Brothers is the accused No. 1 and M/s. Deepak Thakkar, a partner of accused No. 1 is accused No. 2. The complaint is filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that the accused have issued a cheque dated 20-12-1991 vide Ex. P-2 which has bounced back with the endorsement of the Bank 'exceeds arrangement'. The complainant accordingly received the dishonoured cheque along with the cheque returned memo dated 29-4-1992 from the bankers on 13-5-1992. Thereafter a legal notice dated 15-5-1992 was issued to the accused calling upon him to make the payment of a sum of Rs. 2,64,000/- together with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of...
Botukam Narsaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALT(Cri)568; II(1997)DMC539
N.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.1. The accused in Sessions Case No. 581 of 1994 filedthis Criminal Appeal aggrieved by conviction recorded against him for the offenceunder Section 302 1PC and sentence of imprisonment for life.2. The gravamen of the charge against the accused is that the accusedsubjected his wife, Botukam Padma, to ill-treatment, harassment and crueltyprior to 14.5.1994 to extract dowry of Rs. 3,000/- and that on 14.5.1994 at about10 p.m. at Nagulapat village he caused the death of his wife by pouring keroseneon her and setting fire to her within seven years of her marriage and therebycommitted offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302 and 304B, 1PC.3. The case of the prosecution is as follows :The sole accused was the husband of the deceased Botukam Padma agedabout 18 years belonging to a poor family. Accused married the deceasedabout an year ago. At the time of the marriage, the parents (P.Ws. 1 -and 2)of the deceased agreed to pay Rs. 3,000/- towards dowry but they couldpay...
Srinivasa Metal Stores Rep. by Its Managing Partner, Sri Kandula Venka ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT510
ORDERB.S. Raikote, J.1. This is a revision petition preferred by the original tenant being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tenali dated 1-12-1995 passed on his file in R.C.A.No. 23 of 1987, by which, the judgment and order of the Rent Controller, Tenali, dated 20-11-1987 passed in R.CC.No. 24 of 1985 has been set aside by directing the eviction of the petitioner. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the judgment of the lower appellate Court was liable to be set aside on the ground that the lower Court misdirected itself while allowing the appeal. He submitted that the Rent Controller has rightly dismissed the eviction petition filed by the respondent-landlord by holding that the respondent/landlord has not proved his bonafide requirement and also the wilful default. On the other hand the learned Counsel for the respondent strenuously supported the order of the lower appellate Court. In order to appreciate the riv...
Anonymous Letter-un-signed Vs. the Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALD(Cri)333; 1997(1)ALT481
P.S. Mishra, C.J.1. A letter, although unsigned and with uncivilised references to a Member of Legislative Assembly but containing informations of screening of blue/ obscene /vulgar films or film clippings, has been received in Court and treated as a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Following the receipt of the said letter, the Court instructed two learned Advocates of this Court Mrs. Sumalini Reddy and Mrs. G. Jyothi Kiran to witness the two films 'Dark Dancer' and 'Secret Games - 3' in Ramakrishna 70 MM, one of the Theatres in the City, which allegedly was exhibiting the films, and report to this Court. Learned Advocates have reported to the Court that as per the instructions of the court, they visited the Theatre at Abids at 11.45 A.M. and narrated the events in these words:We approached the Booking counter of Rs. 20/- and asked for tickets. The Booking clerk first informed us that it is an English movie and it is not meant for ladies to view. When we insiste...
Kancharana Suryanarayana (Died) and ors. Vs. Kancharana Gopaludu (Died ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1996
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT773
P. Ramakrishnam Raju, J.1. Respondent Nos. 2 to 14 in the appeal are the appellants, since they are transposed as appellant Nos. 27 to 39 by an order dated 6-6-1996 in C.M.P. No. 2096 of 1995. Originally the suit was filed by the first respondent against his brothers for partition of the joint family properties into three equal shares and for allotment of one such share to him. A preliminary decree was passed on 31-8-1981. Questioning the said decree, defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 4 filed the appeal. Pending appeal, appellant Nos. 1 to 3 died and their legal representatives are brought on record as appellant Nos. 4 to 26. While the appeal is pending, respondent Nos. 2 to 14 in the appeal who are now transposed as appellant Nos. 27 to 39 filed an application for impleading them as respondents in the appeal since they have purchased various plots from the second defendant and the legal representatives of the first defendant in item 2 of the plaint schedule property which is Ac. 1-13 cents in S...
K. Krishnaiah and ors. Vs. the District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALT350
M.N. Rao, J.1. Seeking election to the Office of Sarpanch of Juvvalapalem Gram Panchayat of Naidupet Mandal, Nellore District, three persons - petitioner No. 1, one Masthanaiah and the fifth respondent - filed nominations. The office of Sarpanch, Juvvalapalem Gram Panchayat was reserved in favour of Backward Classes and this fact is not in dispute. The fifth respondent filed his nomination claiming himself to be a member of 'Ganika' caste, which, uncontroversially, is a recognised backward community. What was at issue was whether the fifth respondent really was a member of 'Ganika' caste? In support of his claim that he belongs to 'Ganika' caste, the fifth respondent filed a certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, the fourth respondent herein. The polling took place on 30-6-1995, but the results were not announced because of certain orders passed by this Court in batch of writ petitions. On 1-9-1995, Masthanaiah, one of the unsuccessful contestants for the office of Sarpanch,...
Psg Industrial Institute Rep. by Its Chief Petitioner Executive, Swami ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)ALT473
ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. The petitioners are defendants in the suit O.S. No. 923 of 1991 (on the file of the 18th Assistant Judge, City Civil Court). The suit was filed for eviction of the petitioners from the premises and recovery of mesne profits. The agreement dt. 19-12-1987 termed as a lease agreement which was filed by the plaintiff himself was sought to be marked by the petitioners in support of their case that the lease was renewable for a further period at their option. The plaintiff's counsel objected for marking the document on the ground that it is an unregistered document and therefore hit by Section 17(b) of the Registration Act. It was also pointed out that the document bears deficit stamp-duty and on this ground also, it is inadmissible in evidence.2. The learned Assistant Judge held that the defendants can mark the document for the limited purpose of proving the nature of possession. He relied inter alia on the decision of this Court reported in T. Venkatamma v. ...
V.V. Rama Rao Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1996
Reported in: AIR1997AP344
ORDER1. Heard Sri V.V.N. Narasimham, learned counsel for the opetitioner and Sri D. Krishna Murthy, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the Central Government on behalf of the Respondents.2. The petitioner is a Proprietor of a Small Scale Industry carrying on business in the name and style of M/s. V. V, Rama Rao and Company. The petitioner applied for and was sanctioned three telephones in the name of the said Proprietary concern of M/s. V.V. Rama Rao and Company. The three telephones so installed bear Nos. 545124 (installed at the residence of the petitioner), 545125 and 547539 installed at the Factory.3. The petitioner is also the Director of three Companies viz., M/s. Leonics Television Private Limited, M/s. Professional Grade Components Limited and Fenovision Limited. The said Companies are incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and have Telephones bearing Nos. 547206, 547835, 548499, 548525 and 548957. The said Companies have suffered losses and have not been able to pay the Te...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »