Andhra Pradesh Court June 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.
Siva Stone Crusher Vs. Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Officer
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-1997
Reported in: AIR1998AP24; 1997(4)ALT731
ORDERB.K. Somasekhara, J.1. The impugned proceedings of the respondent namely, the Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Officer, Vigilance and Enforcement Department, Guntur, in No. 21/V&E;/NR/96-97 dated 8-1-1997 is challenged in this writ petition as violative of the principles of natural justice and to pass appropriate orders.2. The petitioner is the proprietor of M/s. Siva Stone Crusher. The said firm which is a stone crushing unit in Perecherla village of Guntur since 1994 is stated to have consumed 23160 units of Electric power by crushing at the rate of 4 units per cubic meter worked out at 5790 cubic metrs. out of which, the seigniorage is covered on 700 cub. mtrs. leaving a balance of 5090 cub. mtrs. uncovered and therefore in the impugned proceedings it was alleged that there is a liability on the part of the petitioner to pay Rs. 76,350/-which had not been discharged and therefore, for default, a penalty of five times of seigniorage was levied under Rule 26(3)(1) of the A.P. M...
Union of India (Uoi), Rep. by General Manager, South Central Railway a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT172
P.S. Mishra, C.J.1. The impugned judgment, we are constrained to observe, has been invited by the appellant by its negligence in filing a proper counter affidavit and bringing to the notice of the Court relevant facts. Even without going through any counter affidavit, as stated in the writ petition, which show unambiguously that the petitioner-respondent has raised a money claim on the allegation that there was some variation in the execution of work contract in respect of which, parties had agreed and when demand has been made for payment, the appellants failed to keep the promises. The petitioner-respondent, it is not in dispute, is a contractor, who has executed the work of 'conversion of track from MG to BG in between Hubli-Londa section' under an agreement dated 19-7-1995. According to the petitioner-respondent, he has carried out the work as per agreement and additional work which he was asked to do. After correspondence, variation statement has been prepared and the total amount...
V. Venkateswara Rao Vs. Chairman/Governing Body, S.M.V.M. Polytechnic ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT336
B.K. Somasekhara, J.1. The appellant herein, Sri V. Venkateswara Rao, who is the fifth respondent in W.P.No. 10449/87 has challenged the order of a learned single Judge of this Court dated 14-4-1988. He was the Physical Director of S.M.V.M. Polytechnic, Tanuku of whose Chairman filed the writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 2-6-1987 made by the Respondent No. 4, the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in P.G. Application 2/1986 filed by the 5th respondent wherein he directed payment of gratuity to him. The first respondent is the Government of Andhra Pradesh, the second respondent is the Commissioner of Labour and the third respondent is the Director of Technical Education. Reference to them for the status in the writ proceedings is conveniently made in this Appeal.2. The undisputed factual graphic is being stated. The 5th respondent although was a Physical Director, was a member of the teaching staff in the Polytechnic. He was superannuated and ...
Kota Narasimham and ors. Vs. Referring Officer (R.D.O.)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-1997
Reported in: 1997(5)ALT279
P. Venkatarma Reddy, J.1. This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act') is preferred by the claimants-land holders, not being satisfied with the enhancement of compensation to the extent of Rs. 8,000/- per acre as against Rs. 3,500/- awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. An extent of Ac. 4.60 cents was acquired by means of a notification published on 24-3-1981 under Section 4(1) of the Act. The possession of the land was taken on 21-6-1981 and award was passed on 30-3-1982 by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur, who was the Land Acquisition Officer. The land in question was dry land situated in the village of Gudlur, Prakasam district. The land-holders claimed the compensation @ Rs. 12,000/- per acre taking into account the physical features of the land. Taking into consideration the sale deeds relied upon by both the sides and potentialities of the land, the learned Subordinate Judge fixed the market value at Rs. 8,000/- per acre. Though the le...
Principal, University of Hyderabad Campus School, P.O. Central Univers ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(4)ALD548; 1997(4)ALT643
ORDERP.S. Mishra, CJ.1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent has arisen out of a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. Petitioner-respondents, it is not in dispute, are employees in the University of Hyderabad Campus School, which is affiliated to Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi. According to the petitioner-respondents, the school is governed by the norms prescribed for Kendriya Vidyalayas and as per the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghatan Regulations, the salaries for the post of T.G.Teachers, the posts of the petitioner-respondents being under the said category, are in the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2600. Petitioner-respondents, it is said, however, were appointed after a due selection to various posts vide a notification dated 25-7-1989 of the School (University) in the scale of pay of Rs. 1200-2040. They could know of the anamoly in the scale of pay only after being in the service and they have ever since been agitating and making represen...
State Bank of India Vs. Sarathi Engineering Enterprises
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT392; [1998]93CompCas529(AP)
Lingaraja Rath, J. 1. The appellant-the State Bank of India-has approached against the order of the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Saroornagar, Hyderabad, assailing the order directing injunction against it to permit the respondent to withdraw 85 per cent. of the amount credited into the account of the petitioner and not to withhold the amount without due process of law. The respondent brought the suit O.S. No. 599 of 1995, against the appellant for a decree to direct the appellant to grant, necessary and needful loan facilities and other banking limits, i.e., cash, credit limit, bank guarantee limit and letter of credit limits after making the necessary estimates by the appellant or by the Advocate-Commissioner appointed by the court and permit the respondent to continue to operate the account cash credit No. 5/18 and use or withdraw the deposits. The suit is being resisted by the appellant on the ground of no entertainability in view of the circular of th...
S. Kannan Vs. D.V. Padmaja and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)ALD(Cri)6; 1997CriLJ3994
ORDER1. Whether the order passed by the learned Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (Mahila Court), Hyderabad in Crl. M.P. No. 559 of 1996 in C.C. No. 251 of 1993 is legal and tenable is the question raised in this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short 'the Cr.P.C.') 2. The petitioner is the sole accused in C.C. No. 251 of 1993 which is pending on the file of the learned Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (Mahila Court), Hyderabad. One D. V. Padmaja, who is respondent No. 1 here, is the defacto-complainant. The petitioner is charged for the offence under Section 493 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the I.P.C.'). After framing of the charges, the petitioner was facing trial. Several witnesses on behalf of the prosecution were examined and when the case was fixed for arguments, the defacto-complainant filed an application for grant of interim compensation under Section 357, Cr.P.C. The learned Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, before the de...
D. Vimala Vs. Canara Bank, Mettuguda, Secunderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-1997
Reported in: 1997(6)ALT62
R. Bayapu Reddy, J. 1. This revision petition is filed against the orders dated 3-3-1993 passed in E.A. No. 125 of 1992 in E.P. No. 46/1991 in O.S. No. 1252/1988 on the file of the First Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad. 2. The respondent which is Canara Bank is the Decree Holder in O.S. No. 1252/1988. The decree was sought to be executed against the second Judgment Debtor by name D. Dayanand who was a railway employee. He died during the pendency of the execution proceedings. Subsequently, the gratuity amount due to him and which was payable to his wife and other legal representatives was attached by issuing prohibitory order against the garnishee who is the Deputy Collector of Stores, South Central Railway, Secunderabad. The Decree Holder filed E.A. No. 125 of 1992 requesting the Court to execute the decree against the wife of the deceased-Judgment Debtor No. 2 who died during the pendency of the execution proceedings and compel her to pay the E.P. amount out of the gr...
Jupudi Sriranganayakulu Vs. Bonagiri Subbalakshmi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT740
ORDERY.V. Narayana, J.1. Tenant, who suffered an order of eviction at the appellate stage, is the revision petitioner herein. The respondent-landlady filed the petition before the learned Rent Controller, Rajahmundry, in R.C.C. No. 20/1987 Under Section 10 (3) (a) (iii) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short, 'the Act')- seeking eviction of the revision petitioner-tenant from the petition schedule premises on the ground of bona fide requirement contending that the said premises is required for use by her husband as he intended to start a kirana business therein. In support of her contention, the landlady examined her husband as P.W. 1. On behalf of the tenant, he got himself examined as R.W.1. After hearing the arguments advanced on both sides, the learned Rent Controller dismissed the said petition by order dated 7-6-1993 holding that the non-examination of the landlady is fatal to the case. Thereupon, the matter was carried in appeal before the Ap...
Vuppala Rama Mohana Rao Vs. Venkineni Parameshwara Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT613
ORDERY.V. Narayana, J.1. Landlord is the revision petitioner herein. His petition filed under Section 10 (2) (i) and Section 10 (3)(a) (iii) (a) & (b) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short, 'the Act'), in R.C.C.No. 26/1985 was allowed by the learned Rent Controller, Eluru, by Order dated 5-3-1992. However, on an appeal by the tenant, the Appellate Authority (Subordinate Judge, Eluru) by Order dated 25-7-1994 in C.M.A.No. 6/1992, reversed the findings of the learned Rent Controller and dismissed the petition for eviction. Hence, the revision.2. Brief facts:- The revision petitioner's father let out the petition schedule shop to the tenant about 30 years back and after the demise of his father, the revision petitioner became owner of the shop. The respondent is carrying on brass and steelware business in the petition schedule shop, and he has been continuing the said business as on the date of filing the petition for eviction by the landlord. The lan...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »