Andhra Pradesh Court June 1996 Judgments

A.P.S.F. Corporation and Another Vs. G. Ravi Kumar

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The A.P. State Financial Corporation, Opposite party in CDC 202/94, District Forum, Chittoor on 27.1.94 published in the newspaper calling for tenders from the public for sale of M/s. Deep Krishna Oil Mills, evidently for the arrears due to it from the said Oil Mills. In the advertisement Ex. Al one 20 H.P. Electric Motor was mentioned as item No. 3 and is one of the items of M/s. Deep Krishna Oil Mills is the subject matter of tender. Basing on the said advertisement, the complainant on 10.2.94 submitted a tender for Rs. 1,30,000/- on instalment payment basis and according to the terms of the tender, deposited Rs. 61,500/- in four instalments and the opposite party sanctioned loan of Rs. 68,500/- to the complainant. According to the complainant at the time of taking delivery of all the accessories of the oil mill, he found that 20 H.P. motor was not available and, therefore, demanded the opposite party to deliver 20 H.P. motor as mentioned in the pu...

Hindustan Corporation (Hyderbad) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S. United India Fire ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1997AP347

ORDERS. Parvatha Rao, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the 1st respondent.2. The appellant is a transport company. It questions the judgment dated 2-6-1987 of a learned single Judge of this Court in C.C.C.A. No. 36 of 1979 confirming the judgment and decree dated 19-9-1978 of the learned 6th Additional Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad in O. S. No. 611 of 1975 filed by the respondents herein decreeing the suit and awarding a sum of Rs. 7,961.80 Ps. to the respondents to he paid by the appellant towards loss and damage caused to the goods of the 2nd respondent, which were entrusted to the appellant for transporting from Hyderabad to Madras on a finding that there was negligence on the part of the appellant carrier. The 1st respondent is the Insurance Company with which the '2nd respondent insured the goods while in transit after entrustment to the appellant for transport.3. Entrustment of 41 bales of semi tannedsleep skin to the appellant carr...

Bpl Limited Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(3)ALT595; [2000]117STC373(AP)

ORDERSyed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. These two civil miscellaneous petitions are filed in the tax revision cases, which are preferred, by the same petitioner under section 22(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act'), against the orders of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, dismissing the appeals relating to the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96. 2. In these petitions, the petitioner seeks stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs. 8,83,143, payable pursuant to the provisional assessment for the assessment year 1994-95 and a sum of Rs. 31,30,744 found due on provisional assessment for the assessment year 1995-96. 3. Sri S. Krishna Murthy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the provisional assessments are wholly erroneous as the goods in question are washing machines with micro processing system which is an electronic system so the goods should have been treated as electronic goods but not as electrical goods for th...

Amtual Hafeez Vs. D. Mohammed Ibrahim (Died) Per L.Rs.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(3)ALT736

S. Dasaradha Rama Reddy, J.1. This is a revision petition filed Under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short the Act) by the tenant who lost in both the Courts below. The petitioner is a tenant of residential premises at Guntakal from 8-9-1978 on a monthly rent of Rs. 125/-. The respondent filed eviction petition Under Sections 10(2)(i) and 10(3)(a)(i) of the Act on the ground of wilful default and bona fide requirement for own occupation respectively. Both the Courts rejected the plea of wilful default but upheld the plea of bona fide requirement viz., that the premises is required by the landlord's son for starting carpet business at Guntakal. Against the order of the appellate Court, the tenant filed this revision. Pending revision, the landlord died and his legal representatives were impleaded on 2-2-1996 in C.M.P. 18075/95.2. The only contention urged by Smt. K. Sesharajyam, learned Cousel for the petitioners is that as the premises ...

M/S. Multimetals Limited Vs. M/S. Suryatronics Privated Limited

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1997AP13

ORDER1. The petitioner filed this petition seeking to wind up the respondent-company on the ground that it has failed to pay Rs. 4,16,239/- including interest and bank charges of Rs.2,405/- which represents the amount due by the respondent in respect of the brass tubes supplied to it by the petitioner. The respondent filed counter contending that though the three invoices were raised on 29-3-1991, goods were actually despatched long afterwards, that the balance of Rs. 1,10,620/-only remained payable which was being remitted on 4-11-1994 and that there is no stipulation for payment of interest The petitioner filed rejoinder stating that the Chief Executive of the respondent-company agreed to make balance payment together-with overdue interest from 24-5-1991 and that the petitioner has not received the cheque for Rs. 1,10,620/- referred to in the counter. However, it is now admitted by both sides that the cheque for Rs, 1,10,620/- dated 4-11-1994 has since been received by the petitioner...

Multimetals Ltd. Vs. Suryatronics Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [1997]89CompCas259(AP)

S. Dasaradha Rama Reddy, J.1. The petitioner filed this petition seeking to wind up the respondent company on the ground that it has failed to pay Rs. 4,16,239 including interest and bank charges of Rs. 2,405 which represents the amount due by the respondent in respect of the brass tubes supplied to it by the petitioner. The respondent filed a counter contending that though the three invoices were raised on March 29, 1991, goods were actually despatched long afterwards, that the balance of Rs. 1,10,620 only remained payable which was being remitted on November 4, 1994, and that there is no stipulation for payment of interest. The petitioner filed rejoinder stating that the chief executive of the respondent company agreed to make the balance payment together with overdue interest from May 24, 1991, and that the petitioner has not received the cheque for Rs. 1,10,620 referred to in the counter. However, it is now admitted by both sides that the cheque for Rs. 1,10,620 dated November 4, 1...

Pantham Brahmam Vs. Gollipalli Swaminaidu

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(2)ALT652

ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. Order passed on an application filed under Order 18 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code in I.A.No. 929 of 1994 in O.S.No. 279 of 1987 on the file of the District Munsif, Srungavarapukota, dt. 28-12-94 for recalling P.W.2 is the subject matter of challenge in this C.R.P. 2. Counsel for the petitioner states that on an application filed by the respondent under Order 18 Rule 17 of C.P.C to recall P.W.2 for further cross-examination, the lower Court erroneously allowed the application though resisted by the petitioner herein. It is stated, the provisions contemplated under Order 18 Rule 17 of C.P.C only invests powers in the Court to suo uiotu recall the witness for questioning and it is not open to the parties to file an application seeking recalling of a witness for further cross-examination.3. In view of this submission, it is to be examined whether the provisions contemplated under Order 18 Rule 17 of CPC are to be construed to say that it is only the Court w...

Smt. Kommuri Prameela Vs. Mahankali Annapurnamma and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(3)ALT349

ORDERS. Dasaradha Rama Reddy, J. 1. This is revision petition filed by the plaintiff against the order of the trial Court admitting a document overruling the objection raised by her that the document sought to be marked by the respondent/defendant is a partition deed and cannot be admitted in evidence as it is neither stamped nor registered. The deed which is in Telugu is dated 7-7-1980. The recitals are as follows:(Telugu version - omitted)Relevant Matter:'Asti Pampakam Kararunama - Suryanarayanaku Rabadina Aasti Vivaram - Satyanarayana Ravuku Vachina Vaata Vivaram - Parikattuku Sharachesi Vrayinchukagalvaram.2. The lower Court held that the recitals are in past tense and hence the deed is a family arrangement regarding partition that has already taken place.3. The contention of Mr. Ghanta Rama Rao, learned counsel for petitioner is that the conclusion of the lower Court is patently contrary to the recitals in the deed. I agree with him. As can be seen from the recitals extracted abov...

Parvathi Combines, Rep. by Its Managing Partner, Smt. A. Mangalagowri ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(3)ALT623

Lingaraja Rath, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant. It filed this Letters Patent Appeal against the reversing judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing the suit seeking declaration of the assessment made on 30-3-1975 and the revised assessment on 30-9-1975 in respect of the plaintiff's cinema theatres, arbitrary, capricious, illegal and liable to be set aside. The previous assessment of the two theatres was assessed at the rateable value of Rs. 6,800/- which was, by the impugned assessment, enhanced to Rs. 15,842-07 p. The assessment was challenged in appeal and revision under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 (for short 'the Act') but those proved abortive. The suit was thereafter filed. The trial Court found the provisions of the law in making the assessment to have been complied with, but held the assessment as arbitrary for having not taken into account the assessment in respect of similar theatres which it found was a necessary requirement Under Rule...

Tayyaba Sultana Vs. Branch Manager, Lic of India and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. One Syed Mohd.Bakar submitted a proposal on 29.7.90 to the L.I.C. of India i.e.opposite party to insure his life for a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs with double accident benefit facility. The proposal was accepted and Endowment Assurance policy with Profits (Accident Benefit) bearing No. 640703551 was issued. He died on 18.11.92 in Princes Esra Hospital, Hyderabad due to chest pain (Miocardia Infraction). His wife i.e.complainant preferred a claim for payment of the amount under the policy. The opposite party by letter dated 15.6.93 repudiated their liability on the ground that the assured in the proposal form suppressed the fact of his suffering from diabetes for about six years before the proposal and also that he had consulted a medical man and had taken treatment in the hospital. Hence the above complaint was filed claiming payment of a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs under the policy with interest at 18% p.a. and compensation of Rs. 1 lakh for inconvenience and mental ...