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.
M. Yeshwanth Kumar, Advocate Vs. the Executive Officer/Sarpanch Sharem ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)ALT8
ORDERB.S.A. Swamy, J.1. The petitioner is a practicing advocate at Hyderabad and filed the present Writ Petition questioning the inaction on the part of the District Collector in not giving sanction to the Gram Panchayat for paying his legal fees for the cases in which he represented the Gram Panchayat.2. Under Section 80 of the A.P. Gram Panchayats Act enumerated the expenses to be incurred from Gram Panchayat fund and under sub-section (vi) (sic. sub-clause (vi) of Clause (a) of Section 80(2)) it shall be the duty of the Gram Panchayat to provide for payment of any other expenses rendered obligatory by or under the Act or any other law. In fact, the Government issued G.O.Ms. No. 461, Panchayat Raj (Panchayat 8), dated 12-4-1965, wherein rules were framed for entrustment of the legal work by the Gram Panchayats either to the Law Officers or other counsel under the Act. As per the rules, normally the Gram Panchayat is expected to engage the services of a Government Pleader or a Public ...
R. Ramachandran Vs. Yerram Sesha Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALD(Cri)169; 1997(1)ALT(Cri)217; [1999]96CompCas830(AP); 1997CriLJ1595
ORDER1. These Criminal Petitions are being disposed of by a common order as they raise an identical point for decision. 2. For purposes of convenience the facts in Crl. P. No. 5145 of 1996 are only stated. It is alleged that first respondent was doing cotton business. He is the Managing Partner of the firm M/s. Yerram Sesha Reddy and Company. The petitioner is the Chairman of M/s. Ravindra Mills Limited, Coimbatore. The petitioner issued a cheque dated 23-9-1995 for a particular sum on Bank of Baroda of which the main branch is at Coimbatore. The cheque was in favour of the first respondent. The first respondent presented the cheque in his account with his banker. However, after due advice, the cheque was returned with endorsement that the drawer had stopped the payment. This was on 25-10-1995. Thereafter, the first respondent after following the procedure of issuing notice etc. as required by the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), file...
N. Pattabhi Ramaiah and ors. Vs. Nalluri Krishna Mohan Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT706
P. Ramakrishnam Raju, J.1. The unsuccessful defendants are the appellants. The suit is filed for recovery of Rs. 20,710/- on the foot of a promissory note dated 25-9-1976 alleged to have been executed by the appellants Nos. 1 and 2. Appellant No. 1 is the father of the other appellants. The appellants constitute a joint, Hindu family and are carrying on business in the name and style of Nalluri Pattabhiramayya and Company. The appellants were purchasing tobacco from the respondent and thereby they became indebted to him on that account and also towards hire charges for employing the tractor for ploughing their land and also borrowed some hand loan. The appellants settled the account on 25-9-1976 and the outstanding came to Rs. 16,000/- and accordingly they executed the suit promissory note marked as Ex.A-1. The purpose for which the pronote was executed was clearly mentioned. Before filing the suit a registered notice was also issued on 11-7-1979, office copy of which is marked as Ex.A...
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Rep. by Its Manager Vs. Kothakatt ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALT417
B.K. Somasekhara, J.1. The three appeals are of the authorship of the Oriental Insurance Company Limited (insurer) and the respondent No. 2 in O.P. Numbers 203, 204 and 270 of 1989 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District filed by the claimants. The claimants in O.P. 203/1989 are respondents 1 to 3 in C.M.A. 395/1991 and the owner 1st respondent is R-4 in C.M.A. 395/1991. The claimants in O.P. 204/1989 are respondents 1 to 5 and the owner of the vehicle /first respondent is respondent No. 6 in C.M.A. 412/1991. Whereas the claimants in O.P. 270/1989 are respondents 1 to 15 and the first respondent in the O.P. who is the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident is respondent No. 16 in C.M.A. 579 of 1991. The cross-objections are filed by the claimants in O.P. 270/1989 in C.M.A. 579 of 1991.2. The Tribunal dealt with and disposed of the O.Ps. separately. However, they arise, out of the same motor vehicle accident. The...
S. Elisha and ors. Vs. World Missionary Evangelism of India Rep. by It ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)ALT155
1. An objection has been raised by the Registry to the maintainablity of these appeals under the Letters Patent as the orders were passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code. The note of the Registry states that the L.P.As. of the present nature are barred under the provisions of Section 104(2) of the Civil Procedure Code. Mr. S.A. Chari, learned Counsel for the appellants raises the question that the appeals were never preferred under Order 43 Rule 1 C.P.C., but were filed Under Section 96 of C.P.C. read with Section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Societies Registration Act, 1350 Fasli (hereinafter shortly referred as 'the Act'). Inasmuch as the decision of the learned Principal District Judge was a decree as defined Under Section 2(2) of the C.P.C., it is appealable as provided Under Section 96 of C.P.C.2. There is no dispute about the fact that the first respondent is a Society registered under the ...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Wali Ahmed and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)ALT218
ORDERB.K. Somasekhara, J.1. These four appeals are the products of the common award rendered in O.P. Nos. 255/88, 256/88, 258/88 and 257/88 respectively by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Warangal dated 6-11-1990 in the claim petitions Under Section 10-A of the M.V. Act (in short, the Act) fastening the liability on the 3rd respondent/insurer/appellant to pay the compensation in all the cases. The insurer denied the liability to pay the compensation in view of the fact that gratutious passengers who were carried in the vehicle involved in the accident are not covered by the risk under the terms of the policy and the Tribunal was wrong in mulcting the insurer in liability 'in paying the compensation. Mr. Kota Subba Rao, the learned Counsel for the appellant in all the appeals has tried to drive home such a contention by relying upon New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Shanti Bai 1995 (1) ACJ 470 (SC) = 1995 (1) ALT 2 (D.N.) , Preniner Insurance Co. Ltd. v. V. Siromanamma and Ors. 1984 ...
Machineni Kishan Rao Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-1996
Reported in: AIR1997AP275
ORDERP.S. Mishra, C.J. 1. Heard on the question of maintainability of the writ petition. Petitioner has sought intervention of this Court in exercise of its power under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:a) Writ or order or direction more preferably one in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 herein to consider the unanimous resolution sent to them on 1-11-1996 from M/s. Tclangana Sangharsh Sa-mithi, Hyderabad requesting the respondents 1 to 4 to carve out a separate Telangana State comprising 10 districts namely Adilabad, Karimnagar, Warangal, Nalgonda, Nizama-bad, Mahabubnagar, Medak, Khammam, Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy districts, and; b) Direct the respondents 1 to 4 to establish the separate State of Telangana State that is to be carved out from the present Andhra Pradesh State and pass such other order or orders as' this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. Respondents 1 to 4 in the writ petition are -(...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rayalaseema Mills Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-1996
Reported in: [1997]228ITR477(AP)
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. The Division Bench of this court, which dealt with this reference case under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), at the instance of the Revenue, not agreeing with the judgment of this court in Addl. CIT v. Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. : [1980]122ITR251(AP) , referred this case to the Full Bench. 2. The respondent-company is the assessee. In the previous year ending with December 31, 1979, relevant to the assessment year 1980-81, the assessee paid advance tax of Rs. 23,65,000 in three instalments; the first instalment of Rs. 1,00,000 was paid on June 16, 1979; the second instalment of Rs. 11,32,500 was paid on September 14, 1979, and the third instalment of an equal amount was paid on December 15, 1979. Before the Income-tax Officer, the assessee represented that in view of the brought forward losses the assessee estimated its income at Rs. 5,00,000 for the assessment year 1980-81 and accordingly paid the advance tax instalm...
M. Veera Raghavaiah Vs. P. Singa Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)ALT699
Neelam Sanjiva Reddy, J.1. This writ appeal has been filed by the first respondent in W.P. No. 1966/90 questioning the finding of the learned single Judge that the sale of Ac. 2-64 cents in E.P.No. 199/72-73 in favour of the first respondent suffers from material irregularities resulting in substantial injury to the judgment- debtor and consequently set aside the sale in favour of the first respondent.2. Parties are referred to as arrayed in the writ petition for the sake of convenience. A few facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the writ petitioner is a member of R-3, the Munipalle Co-op. Marketing Society Ltd., Munipalle. In a claim petition filed by R-4, the Guntur Dist. Co-op. Marketing Society Ltd., Guntur, an award was passed against R-3 for recovery of Rs. 9,500/-. In Execution Proceedings i.e. E.P. No. 199/72-73 filed by R-4 consequent to the award, Ac. 2-64 cents of land of third respondent was attached and sold for Rs. 75,000/- in favour of R-l by R-5, K. Asee...
Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-1996
Reported in: [1997]105STC421(AP)
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. A Common question is argued in the writ petition as well as in the tax revision cases, therefore they are being disposed of by a common judgment. 2. The petitioners in the writ petition seek a declaration that section 2(n) read with explanation IV, sections 5 and 5-E of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, 'the APGST Act') are ultra vires the Constitution of India and the legislative competence of the Andhra Pradesh Legislature in so far as they seek to levy tax on the amounts received on the transfer of the right to use the software and the consequential relief restraining the respondents from taking any steps in furtherance of the impugned provision and also directing the respondents to withdraw the levy among other consequential reliefs. 3. There are two petitioners in the writ petition. The first petitioner is an association of 238 software and service companies, the list of which is enclosed to the writ petition, and the second...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »