Andhra Pradesh Court August 1996 Judgments

Ghulam Jeelani and ors. Vs. Mr. Ghulam Sofi and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(3)ALT643

ORDERK.B. Siddappa, J.1. This Revision is filed against the order passed in O.S.No. 39/90 on the file of District Munsif, Zaheerabad.2. The brief facts are as follows:-When DW-1 was being examined, two documents purported to be partition deeds dated 24-4-1961 and 27-5-1961 respectively, were sought to be marked. That was resisted by the plaintiff.The partition deed dated 24-4-1961 was engrossed on a stamp paper worth of Rs. 2/-. Defendants 6 and 7 are one party and defendants 1 to 3 and the plaintiff are the second party. The plaintiff and defendants 2 and 3 were minors. Therefore, the step mother of defendant No. 1 has represented them in the said document. The stamp duty and penalty were collected on this document on 10-8-1994. There is an endorsement to that effect on the reverse of the document by the Sub-Registrar, Medak of Sangareddy. The question arose is whether that document is admissible in evidence because of non-registration.Partition deed dated 27-5-1961 is with the headin...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Devula Ramulu and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997ACJ1267

B.K. Somasekhara, J.1. These two appeals sprout out of the same award passed in the O.P. No. 349 of 1987 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nizamabad, dated 20.10.1989. The appellant in C.M.A. No. 303 of 1990 is the insurer of the vehicle which was involved in the accident. The appellant in C.M.A. No. 451 of 1990 is the claimant. It is an injury claim case.2. The claimant aged 18 years and a labourer while travelling in an autorickshaw ATT 6206 belonging to one S. Narasaiah, the respondent No. 2, and while it was being driven by one Madhu Rajanna, respondent No. 1, met with an accident on National Highway No. 7 near Gandhi Chowk at Mupkal village. The claim was laid on the allegation that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the autorickshaw by respondent No. 1. The claimant pleaded that he sustained serious injuries, he lost the abilities and also the then income and the future income, he suffered pain etc., and therefore, wanted to be compensated reas...

Namburu Ramanamma Vs. Polavarapu Sarojamma and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(2)ALT(Cri)601; II(1996)DMC665

T. Ranga Rao, J.1. This revision is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to set aside the orders passed in M.C. No. 14 of 1992 Dated 27.6.1995 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore.2. That was a petition filed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the petitioner claiming maintenance against the respondents and the learned Magistrate dismissed the said petition.3. The facts in giving rise to the filing of the revision are, briefly, as follows :The petitioner Namburu Ramanamma filed petition in M.C. No. 14 of 1992 on the file of IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month mainly contend- ing that she is the legally wedded wife of the second respondent and the first respondent is the daughter of the petitioner and second respondent and they are having movable and immovable properties. It is further alleged that the petitioner was a sickly...

Mohd. KareemuddIn Khan (Died) and ors. Vs. Syed Azam

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(2)ALT625

1. The plaintiffs are the appellants against the confirming judgments dismissing the suit brought for declaration of title and eviction of the sole defendant-respondent from Survey Nos. 138 and 139 respectively measuring Acs. 3-01 guntas and Acs. 2-26 guntas in Bagh Amberpet, Sarehekha Taluq Musheerabad, Hyderabad. The suit was brought on the pleading of the plaintiffs being the heirs of one Ameeruddin who, according to them, was the pattedar of the land and that after his death on 27th July, 1968, the plaintiffs had been mutated in respect of the land and Kami Izafa has been issued in their favour in 1969. Ameeruddin had sold from Svirvey No.'138 on 2142-1962 by a registered sale deed Ex. B-2 an extent of 9,867 sq. yards to the defendant, and his brother Md. Shamsuddin Khan had sold on 29-5-1961 by a registered sale deed marked as Ex. B-1 12,500 sq. yards from Survey No. 139. The suit was filed to avoid the sales on the contention that the sales were void being hit by Section 47of And...

The Govt. of A.P., Rep. by Its Secretary, Edn. Deptt. and ors. Vs. G.V ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(3)ALT820

P.S. Mishra, C.J.1. The Government of the State has invoked Clause 15 of the Letters Patent of the Court and preferred the instant appeal against the Judgment in W.P. No. 15879 of 1990 holding, inter alia, that the petitioner-respondent is entitled to the arrears of Grant-in-Aid and in its case, the Government Order in G.O.Ms. No. 138 cannot be given effect to. The above Government Order has been issued in the circumstances which are disclosed by the following facts:By G.O.Ms. No. 347 dated 1-8-1986, the petitioner-respondent-school was admitted to Grant-in-Aid with effect from 1-9-1985 and an amount of Rs. 98,400/- with effect from 1-9-1985 to 28-2-1986 was released by the appellant herein as Grant-in-Aid. The Grant, however, was stopped and as there were complaints of misuse of the Grant-in-Aid, the appellant appointed a High Level Committee by G.O. Rt. No. 220 dated 24-2-1988 to go into the irregularities committed by various institutions and misuse of the Grant-in-Aid by them. Befo...

Swasthik Engineer Vs. Jagtial Consumers Welfare Council and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The opposite party in CD 117/94, District Forum, Karimnagar i.e. Swasthik Engineer, Trissur preferred this appeal questioning the order of the District Forum, whereby it directed the opposite party, (1) to replace the defective goods with new goods of similar description free from defects on the complainant paying Rs. 57,500 /- or refund to the second complainant a sum of Rs. 40,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. from 12.5.93, Rs. 40,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. from 4.6.93, Rs.10,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. from 15.10.1993 and Rs.10.000/-with interest at 18% p.a. from 4.1.94 till the date of payment, (2) topayRs.25,000/- towards compensation to the second complainant, and (3) to pay costs of Rs. 500/-. 2. The above complaint was filed by Jagtial Consumer Welfare Council, Jagtial represented by its Secretary and Jagtial Tyres represented by George E. Jocob against the Swasthik Engineering. 3. The case of the complainants was that the second compl...

M/S. Vijaya Associates Vs. the District Collector, Ranga Reddy Distric ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1997AP20; 1996(2)ALD(Cri)628; 1996(3)ALT901

ORDER1. The petitioner applied for a licence, to possess and sell explosives by establishing a Magazine for the storage of explosives, to the third respondent who is the competent authority for grant of such licence. It is averred in the affidavit filed in support of the above Writ Petition that the petitioner had purchased land in Sy. Nos. 756 to 766 of Ankireddipally village, Keesara Mandal, Rangareddy District. The petitioner hadnever carried on the business in explosive earlier and there has been no complaint against the petitioner under the Explosives Act, 1984 or under the Explosives Substances Act, 1988. However, the petitioner's brother Sri A. Indrasena Reddy has been carrying on business in explosives under the name and style of M/s. Vijaya Associates which was a proprietory concern and that the petitioner has nothing to do with the aforesaid business. It appears that a case is pending against the petitioner's brother under the Explosives Act and on that ground the Superintend...

D.V. Venkateswara Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(4)ALD472; 1996(2)ALD(Cri)776; 1997CriLJ919

ORDER1. This is a revision preferred against the order of the IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, dated 24-10-1995 passed in Crl.M.P. No. 1004/90 in C.C. No. 112/90. The petitioner herein is the 2nd accused and the 1st accused is one Purnachandra Rao. 2. On a complaint forwarded by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Vijayawada, the learned IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada took the case and file against Y. Purnachandra Rao (A1) for the offences u/S. 218 r/w. 109 and 471, IPC and against the petitioner herein (A2) for the offence u/S. 218, IPC. On behalf of the petitioner, Crl.M.P. No. 1004/90 was filed before the Magistrate to discharge him on the main ground that the petitioner is a public servant and acts done by him as a public servant, he is protected under Section 197(1), Cr.P.C. and as such, he is liable to be discharged. 3. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 24-10-1995 dismissed the said petition observing that 'though Purnachandra Rao (A1) died subsequent, there is prima...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.P. Paper Mills.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [1997]225ITR262(AP)

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri J.1. In these reference cases, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, the following question is referred to this court for opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law holding that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on motor trucks ?' 2. The assessee in all these cases is the same. The question arises in respect of different assessment years. R.C. No. 13 of 1988 relates to the assessment year 1979-80; R.C. No. 22 of 1988 pertains to the assessment years 1977-78 and 1978-79 and R.C. No. 101 of 1988 arises from out of assessment proceedings for the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. The assessee, a public limited company, purchased trucks. The depreciation allowance, which is the subject-matter of these references, was claimed by the assessee for the abovesaid assessment years. Various amounts were claimed for those assessment years. After purchas...

The Chief Postmaster-general and anr. Vs. Mirza Jaffer Ali

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(4)ALT1199

P.S. Mishra, C.J.1. Heard.2. Learned single Judge has taken notice of the fact that the father who provides the bread has died in harness and compassion, which prompts appointment of the dependent, loses its value if timely supernumerary appointments are not granted to compensate for the loss of income and has accordingly directed for granting for such compassionate appointment to the petitioner-respondent. Learned Counsel for the appellant has, however, raised two objections - (1) there were materials to show that the family was not under any distress and in any event quite affluent to sustain notwithstanding the loss of breadwinner; and (2) the Court cannot exercise the jurisdiction as the matter pertains to Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act. The first ground has to fail for the simple reason that there are materials adverted to by me learned single Judge which show substantial burden which the family had to bear on account of prolonged illness of the concerned employee ...