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.
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. East Coast Boat Builders and Engineers Ltd ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1997
Reported in: [1997]107STC135(AP)
Lingaraja Rath, J.1. Assailing the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal allowing the two appeals filed by the respondent against the order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and holding that the extra consideration raised by the respondent in the invoice is not permissible to be included in the determination of the turnover of the respondent, this revision has been preferred. 2. The respondent has the business of manufacture of fishing trawlers and during the year under consideration had sold trawlers to three parties. Because of the escalation in the price of certain imported components, the respondent claimed higher price than the agreed amount and raised invoices for that. The assessing authority took the view that having raised invoices, the higher amounts claimed therein are includible in the turnover and the respondent is liable to pay tax on this amount. The respondent disputed the determination, in the first appellate forum, examining various documents executed be...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Famous Enterprises
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1997
Reported in: [1997]107STC486(AP)
Lingaraja Rath, J.1. The question in this revision is whether from February 15, 1989 the tax is leviable on plastic containers - manufactured out of raw plastic which has already suffered tax - under item 19 of the First Schedule to the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (the APGST Act) at the rate of 5 per cent or the manufactured articles are entitled for tax exemption on their sale, in view of G.O. Ms. No. 574, Revenue, dated June 9, 1987 Notification (1) issued by the Government under the provisions of section 9(1) of the APGST Act. The Tribunal in appeal having agreed with the contention of the respondent-assessee, the State has preferred this revision. Entry No. 186 in the First Schedule of the Act subjected plastics to tax at 5 paise in the rupee at the relevant time and under entry No. 187 the tax on articles of plastics was at 6 paise in the rupee. G.O. Ms. No. 574 was issued directing that where tax has been levied and collected under the Act in respect of the sale or purchase ...
Suramoni Balakistaiah and ors. Vs. the District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT53
ORDERKrishna Saran Shrivastav, J.1. 17 Petitioners in this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seek issuance of Writ of Mandamus, quashing the cancellation order dated 03-05-1989 passed by the third respondent.2. I cannot help repeating what Sri Justice M.P. Thakkar of the Apex Court (as then he was) has observed in the case of Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat, : 1983CriLJ1096 that:'human goodness has limits - human depravity has none'.3. The petitioner No. 17 is a member of the Minority Community, while the remainging petitioners are members of the Weaker Sections of the Society. The respondents had acquired S. No. 260 situated in Koilakonda village for providing house sites to the backward classes. After acquisition, they divided the land in various house sites each admeasuring 150 sq. yds and issued patta certificates inter alia to the 17 petitioners and delivered possession of the same to them. The Respondents, then floated a group 'Housing...
A.N. Saraswathi Vs. Gollapalle Munikrishna Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)ALT823
Ramesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. The appellant herein was the original plaintiff who had instituted O.S. 273 of 1995 in the Court of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tirupathi. The suit was filed by the plaintiff against the respondent-defendant herein for permanent injunction. The plaintiff had also filed LA. 1327 of 1995 in O.S. No. 273 of 1995 seeking interim relief. Initially the interim injunction was granted but subsequently on appearance of the defendant and on filing of the counter, it was vacated. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the learned Subordinate Judge, the appellant-plaintiff filed the present appeal.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant, Mr.F.S.Narayana, submitted at the Bar that the appellant-plaintiff had filed certain documents in order to establish his claim for interim injunction. Similarly the respondent-defendant had also filed certain documents to rebut the claim made by the plaintiff. These documents were not marked by the learned Judge. Some of the documents file...
Chota Lal Vs. Bholaram Agarwal and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)ALT530
ORDERM.H.S. Ansari, J.1. At the stage of admission of the above Second Appeal on 3-6-1993, this Court recorded that the substantial question of law is as raised in the grounds of Memo of Appeal. At the time of final hearing, however, it was noticed that the Memorandum of Grounds do not specify the substantial question of law. However, the substantial question of law arising for consideration in this Appeal is whether the possession of the person can be disturbed on the ground of voidness of transaction under which possession is delivered and he can be denied the grant of relief of injunction against third parties on that ground.2. The plaintiff in the suit O.S. No. 310 of 1988 is the appellant herein. The suit was filed against the Respondents - defendants for perpetual injunction restraining them from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit property. It was in the pleadings of the plaintiff that the suit schedule property is having Door No. 17-1-42/1 and is situ...
P. Akshya Lingam and ors. Vs. the Govt. of A.P. Rep. by Its Prl. Secre ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1997
Reported in: 1997(1)ALD(Cri)942; 1997(2)ALT131
ORDERRamesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. The petitioners in the Contempt Case No. 1428 of 1996 had filed W.P. No. 27468 of 1995 with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents therein to reconvey the surplus land of Ac. 1-00 in S.No. 286/AA of S.No. 286 situated at Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam Urban to the petitioners on par with Mr. Athota Radha Kishan Rao basing on the law laid down in the judgment passed in W.P.No. 11040 of 1992 dated 19-9-1994 by duly declaring the inaction of the respondents in not reconveying the land to the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.2. On filing of the writ petition, notices were issued to the respondents therein. The respondents did not appear. Naturally they did not file the counter in spite of service of notices and therefore this Court by an order dated 8-4-1996 had directed the respondents therein to reconvey the land d...
Chennupati Suryaprakasa Rao and anr. Vs. Mallipeddi Venkateswara Rao a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)ALT155
ORDERRamesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. This appeal is filed by the appellants 1 and 2 herein, who were the defendants in O.S. No. 306 of 1990 which was pending on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada.2. The plaintiff Mallipeddi Venkateswara Rao had filed the aforesaid suit against the appellants herein and other defendants for specific performance of the contract of sale which is alleged to have been executed by the defendants therein agreeing to sell the land to the extent of Ac. 0-52 cents in R.S. No. 68/1 situated at Patamata village within the jurisdiction of Vijayawada Municipal Limits. On hearing both sides and on recording the evidence in the aforesaid suit, the suit came to be decreed.3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and decree of Principal Subordinate Juge, Vijayawada, the appellants herein i.e., the defendants 1 and 2 in the suit, have preferred the present appeal by raising various grounds in the appeal memo whereas no appeal was filed by the other def...
Nareddy Raji Reddy and ors. Vs. Pasula Enkamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)ALT481
ORDERKrishna Saran Shrivastav, J.1. This revision is directed against the order passed in E.P.S.R.No. 1643/96, dated 23-11-1996 by the District Munsif, Ibrahimpatnam.2. At the outset, it is to be remarked that, notice before admission was given to the respondents and learned Counsel of both sides were heard on merits.3. The District Munsif, Ibrahimpatnam, in O.S. No. 57/73, dated 17-1-1977, passed a decree for perpetual injunction in favour of N. Ramachandra Reddy and E. Sudershan Reddy and against the respondents restraining the respondents from interfering in their (plaintiffs') possession and enjoyment of the suit lands bearing Survey Nos. 47/2 and 48 of Village Khanpur, Taluk Ibrahimpatnam (suit lands).4. The petitioners filed an application under Order 21 Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure alleging that, some time in the year 1989, there was an oral partition of the suit land between the first petitioner and his brother N. Ramachandra Reddy in which his half share fell to the ...
Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by Its Vice-chai ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALT675
ORDERP.S. Mishra, C.J.1. This appeal has to be allowed oil the sole ground that the impugned direction in the Writ Petition is to consider the application of the petitioner- respondent afresh seeking appointment for his second son on merits under a scheme providing for reservation for the children of the employees who retire after attaining the age of superannuation.2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner retired from the service of the appellants-Corporation on 31-12-1988 after attaining the age of superannuation. Thereafter, he sought employment for his second son Sri N. Krishna, who was interviewed by the Selection Committee of the appellants on 25-5-1990, but was not selected on the ground that the scheme permitted the appellants - Corporation to appoint the son of a retired employee only when any other son of his or child of his was not in the service of the Corporation. Learned single Judge has passed the following Order:'The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner broug...
Rayalaseema Grameena Bank, Rep. by Its Branch Manager Vs. Ragina Yanad ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)ALT57
ORDERV. Bhaskara Rao, J.1. Rayalaseema Grameena Bank filed these two revision petitions challenging the orders in S.C.S.R. No. 2141 of 1993 and S.C.S.R. No. 2142 of 1993 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Rajampet dated 19-7-1993 rejecting the plaints on the ground of bar of limitation.2. The case of the revision petitioner is that the respondents in both the cases have taken loans as 'Crop Loan' for the purpose of raising banana/ maintenance of mango and banana crop under a single bond dated 1-12-1989. Under the terms of the bond interest is payable on 31st March, 30th June, 30th September and 31st December of each year, while the principal is agreed to be paid on 30-5-1990 as per Schedule-II appended to the bond. In case of default of payment of interest on the aforesaid dates, it is agreed that overdue interest is chargeable from time to time and it shall bear compound interest until interest or principal is paid. It has been averred in the plaint that the respondents-defendants fail...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »