Andhra Pradesh Court March 1997 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.
K. Jayalakshmi Vs. S.R. Sonwalkar, General Manager, (Projects) Singare ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD207
ORDERP.S. Mishra, C.J.1. Heard.2. A question has been raised in theinstant appeal whether, while disposing of a contempt petition, directions issued by the Court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be modified. Officer has raised objection as to the maintainability of the appeal only in respect of modification as appeal is provided against conviction in a contempt proceeding under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, but not against the rejection of the petition by a person who brings to the notice of the Court the violation of its order. We, however, do not feel it necessary to consider whether appeal shall lie as of right against the impugned order, dismissing the petition for contempt against the respondents under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act. We are sufficiently persuaded to hold that modification of the directions in the writ petition by the impugned order in itself is a judgment for the purpose of Clause 15 of the Letters P...
K. Narayana and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-1997
Reported in: 1997(1)ALD(Cri)712; 1997(1)ALT(Cri)817; 1997CriLJ3258
Y. Bhaskar Rao, J. 1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 94 of 1995 on the file of the Court of XII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Sub-Inspector of Police, Task Force, South Zone, Hyderabad filed charge sheet against the petitioners alleging that on receipt of information that the petitioners are selling toddy without licence to the customers near Moosram bridge, he conducted raid and found the petitioners selling toddy without any excise licence. He took them into custody and seized one wooden case containing 24 toddy bottles, who wooden cases containing empty bottles and cash of Rs. 205/- form the first petitioner and one wooden case containing 15 bottles of toddy, three wooden cases containing empty bottles and cash of Rs. 405/- from the second petitioner. He brought the petitioners along with seized articles before the Sub-Inspector of Police, Malakpet P.S. ...
N. Surya Kumari Vs. Deputy Transport Commissioner and Secretary, Regio ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT20
ORDERB. Sri Atchutananda Swamy, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent to grant temporary permit in favour of the petitioner to ply her stage carriage bus bearing No. APT. 2264 on the Kakinada town service route - Kakinada Shanthi Nivas Lodge to Samalkota Gandhi Statue, Achutapuram Gate for a period of four months commencing from 27-03-97 to 27-07-97. It is not disputed that the petitioner was granted temporary permit once for a period of four months as per statutory provisions and the same is going to expire on 26-03-97. In the meantime, the petitioner seemed to have filed an application on 15-3-97 to grant fresh permit in view of the language employed in Section 87 of the M.V. Act, 1988 which gives an impression that each application for grant of temporary permits has to be considered as fresh applications and to pass orders. But in my view, when once a temporary permit is granted it is nothing but a renewal of the temporary permit for another period o...
A.P.S.R.T.C. Rep. by Its Managing Director and ors. Vs. B. Subrahmanya ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT656
P.S. Mishra, C.J.1. Heard.2. Writ Petitioner-respondent's father, B. Rosaiah, was a conductor working under the appellant-Corporation. He died in harness on 16-9-1982. At the time of the death of Rosaiah, writ petitioner-respondent was a minor. He attained majority only in the year 1991. Soon thereafter, he applied for being provided with a compassionate appointment, as, according to him, his father had died in harness and that made him eligible for compassionate appointment.3. The above, in our view, is contrary to the rule which has been accepted for the purpose of accepting the compassionate appointment as valid and as an exception to the general rule, under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, of equal protection of law and equality before law. Compassionate appointment is acknowledged as a mode to provide to the family or the dependents of the employee, who died in harness, immediate protection for the loss of the bread winner. Such compassion cannot survive for a period of ei...
Veeramachaneni Krishna Rao and ors. Vs. Dandamudi Baburao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)ALT372
Ramesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Gudivada, in A.S.No. 50 of 1987 dated 31-1-1991 reversing the order in E.A. No. 118 of 1985 in E.P.No. 29 of 1981 in O.S.No.63/80 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Gannavaram, dated 13th August, 1987, the respondents in A.S. 50 of 1987 filed this second appeal.2. In order to appreciate the controversy between the parties, it is necessary to narrate few facts,3. The 2nd respondent herein had instituted OS. 63/80 in the Court of District Munsif, Gannavaram, for recovery of certain amount basing on the pronote. The suit was filed against the appellants herein. The suit was decreed ex parte on 29-7-1980. The 1st appellant herein filed I.A.No. 696 of 1983 under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure. On hearing both sides, the ex parte decree was set aside. It further appears that the 2nd respondent herein, who was the decree holder, filed E.P.No. 29 of 1981 and sought attachmen...
P. Rama Krishna Rao Vs. P. Narasimha Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)ALT682
ORDERA. Hanumanthu, J.1. This revision is directed against the order and decretal order dated 25-1-1993 passed in E.A. No. 134/91 in E.P. No. 79/87 in O.S. No. 153/86 on the file of the District Munsiff, Nandigama in Krishna District. By the impugned order, the learned District Munsiff held that the judgment-debtor is not a small farmer within the meaning of A.P. Act 45 of 87.2. The facts resulting in filing of this revision are as follows:The respondent herein filed the suit O.S. No. 153/86 for the recovery of amount due under a Pronote, dated 17-3-1983 executed by the petitioner herein and that suit was decreed against the petitioner on 24-7-1985. In execution of that decree, the respondent filed E.P No. 79/87 and he brought the immovable properties of the judgment-debtor-petitioner for sale on 25-3-1991. The E.P. Schedule properties were sold through Court in public auction and one Poppuri Seshagiri Rao was the highest bidder for Rs. 46,000/-. On 1-4-1991 the petitioner-judgment-deb...
G. Satyanarayana Vs. Income Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-1997
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(AP)412; [1998]234ITR477(AP); [1999]102TAXMAN346(AP)
Lingaraja Rath, J.1. The petitioner has approached us assailing the communication made to him by respondent No. 1 - ITO, Ward No. 1, Vizianagaram - intimating him with regard to his application for issue of 'no objection certificate' under s. 230A of the IT Act that he should file a revised application duly signed by all the coparceners of the HUF along with evidence that all the properties under consideration belong to the HUF. It is submitted by Smt. M. Bhaskara Lakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the communication is not authorised under the provisions of s. 230A of the IT Act r/w rr. 44A and 44B and Form 34A of the IT Rules, 1962. 2. The brief facts according to the petitioner are that disputes in respect of the joint family properties of the petitioner along with his sons which constitute an HUF were subjected to arbitration in which an award has been passed, but as that award was not liable to be registered until the certificate as contemplated under s. 230A has bee...
Indian Overseas Bank Vs. Kandimalla Narsaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-1997
Reported in: AIR1998AP75; 1997(3)ALT261
ORDERB.S.A. Swamy, J.1. This Revision petition is filed against the order of the Subordinate Judge, Naigonda in C.F.R. No. 1724/96, dated 22-11-1996 wherein the Sub-Judge held that the against defendants 2 and 3, the guarantors for the loan availed by the 1st defendant, is time barred as they did not sign revival letters.2. While ordering notice on admission, I called for a report of the Sub-Judge to explain the circumstances under which he has taken the above view and the legal provision with reference to the limitation. Accordingly, he submitted his report in Dis. No. 3322/97 dated 28-2-1997. In the meantime, the notices sent were served on the parties but they did not choose to appear before this Court, when the matter is taken up for hearing. Hence I am constrained to dispose of the revision petition on merits.3. It is not in dispute that the 1st defendant availed term loan facility from the plaintiff Bank on 27-1-1988 and defendants 2 and 3 stood as guarantors for prompt payment o...
Erasani Venkata Ranga Reddy Vs. the Commissioner of Urban Land Ceiling ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT61
ORDERV. Bhaskara Rao, J.1. This is a Writ Petition seeking modification of the order in file No. UC2/1984/82 and file No. A1/1246/81 of the respondents herein in so far as it related to computation of non-dwelling units and agricultural lands and to exclude the extents as detailed in the petition.2. It is stated in the affidavit of the petitioner that he filed a statement Under Section 6(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, 'the Act') before the Special Officer and competent authority declaring the properties held by him. The competent authority passed an order Under Section 8(4) of the Act and issued a final statement Under Section 9 of the Act computing an extent of 3259.7 Sq. mts. to his holding after allowing an extent of 2000 Sq. mts. towards the ceiling area and thus he has declared an extent of 1259.7 Sq.mts. as excess vacant land by an order in file No. A1/1246/81 dated 8-2-1982.3. His case is that the second respondent has erroneously computed (i) ...
G.V.K. Rama Rao and anr. Vs. Bakelite Hylam Employees Co-op. House Bui ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT304
V. Bhaskara Rao1. The Judgment and decree in A.S. No. 98/1991 on the file of Additional Chief Judge (Temp), City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dated 1-3-1996 reversing the Judgment, Decree and findings of the IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O.S. No. 603/1981, dated 18-3-1991 and consequently dismissing the suit of the plaintiffs, are challenged in this second Appeal by the plaintiffs. The parties will be referred to as arraigned before the trial Court.2. The plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the plaint schedule land. Their case is that they purchased the suit land bearing R.S. No. 120/4 corresponding to old S. No. 403/5 of Shaikpet from its rightful owner through a registered sale deed dated 20-3-1967 and they have been in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the same eyersince that day. The defendant is a Co-operative Housing Building Society and it had purchased some land in S. Nos. l21/A and 129/92/3 situated near Yousuf...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »