Andhra Pradesh Court October 1998 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.
Bolisetti Venkatarathanamma (Died) by Lrs. Vs. Nadakuduti Venkateswara ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD422
ORDER1. Both the appeals arise against the common order passed in OS No. 42 of 1987 and OS No.46 of 1987 on the file of trie Subordinate Judge, Tcnali. These appeals are therefore taken up for disposal togelher. AS No.538 of 1992 arises against the order in OS No.42 of 1987 which is a suit for specific performance filed by the respondent and OS No.46 of 1987 against which transfer appeal No.416 of 1993 arises was filed for recovery of possession of the suil premises from the respondent.AS No.538 of 1992:This appeal is brought by the defendant who is the owner of the suit premises of an extent of 400 Sq. yards with two attached sheds in Repalle Municipality. The respondent filed the suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 21-1-1981 Ex.Al. Under the said agreement the suit premises was agreed to be sold for a consideration of Rs.26,000/- to be paid within one month. At the time of agreement of Rs.20,000/- was paid as advance and the balance of Rs.6,000/- was agreed t...
B. Aruna Vs. Managing Director, Apsrtc, Musheerabad and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD220; 1999(2)ALT102
ORDER1. The petitioner is one of the applicants for the post of Junior Assistant in the office of Second respondent. As per notification published in Eenadu dated 20-11-1997 since appeared for written examination held on 21-12-1997. It is her case that she qualified herself in the written examination and she was waiting for oral interview. She appears to have enquired in the office and she was informed that interviews were to be held on 25-3-1998, but they were postponed due to elections to Lok Sabha. It is also her case that she was told that intimation would be sent to her, but to her surprise she was not selected and some other candidate has been selected. Hence, she filed this writ petition for a direction to declare the action of second respondent in not interviewing her for the above post as arbitrary and illegal.2. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents asserting that interviews have been held after sending intimation to all the candidates who qualified themse...
Govt. of A.P. and Others Vs. Displaced Ryots Association of Pothunuri ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD706; 1998(6)ALT409
ORDERUmesh Chandra Banerjee, CJ 1. This writ appeal has been placed in this list for hearing after having an order of remand from the Supreme Court for further consideration of the Appeal. The Supreme Court, while dealing with the matter observed :''We have read the brief order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissing the writ appeal filed by the appellants before us. Having heard Counsel and seen the proceedings, we are of the view that the writ appeal deserves deeper consideration than has been bestowed on it. To avoid prejudicing the case on either side, we refrain from saying more. The appeal is allowed. The order under appeal is set aside. The writ appeal (Writ Appeal No.852 of 1997) is restored to the file of the High Court to be heard and disposed of on merits.'2. Incidentally, a Division Bench of this Court dismissed the appeal of the State Government inter alia recording the following :'Learned single Judge has taken notice of the negotiable ra...
Abdul Wahab Vs. Secretary, A.P., Wakf Board and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD73; 1999(1)ALT71
ORDER1. In this writ petition, the petitioner assails the action of the respondents in not reentrusting the management of the Darga Hazrath Syed Mohammed Madina Aulia situate at Kalingapatnam to him even after the expiry of the statutory period fixed under Section 43-A of the Wakf Act.2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated:The petitioner's father was the notified hereditary Muthawalti of the said Darga and he died in the year 1972. There was a dispute between the petitioner and his uncle one Abdul Khader regarding the succession to the office of Muthawalli. In view of the said dispute, the management of the Darga was taken over by the Wakf Board on 13-3-1974. After enquiry, the petitioner was appointed as Muthawalli by order dated 5-2-1975 and the same was published in the Gazette on 22-5-1975. Subsequently, there was a complaint of misappropriation of funds and mismanagement of the Darga against the petitioner. White it is the case of the petitioner that he was removed from th...
Varadachary and Company, Hyderabad Vs. Superiniteding Engineer (Operat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-1998
Reported in: 1999(3)ALD599; 1999(3)ALT431
ORDER1. Heard.2. This writ petitioner is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring the notice of termination issued to the petitioner vide proceedings No.SE/OP/MBNR/PO(R)/CRS/CS/NO/308/ 98, dated 21-3- 1998 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to set aside the same. A further direction is sought to continue the entrustment of the work of billing in pursuance of the agreement dated 30-12- 1988.3. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the petitionerCompany is a Chartered Accountant firm known as Varadachari and Company. It entered into an agreement with the Superintending Engineer/Operation, Rural Circle of the A.P.S.E.B., Hyderabad, for maintenance of accounts of the Sub-ERO/ Gadwal in the year 1988 vide letter dated 30-12-1988 and since then the petitioner Company has been maintaining the accounts in respect of the slab card service of the specified areas in the areas of Alampur, Manopad, Itekyal, Wadepally, leez, Maldakal, Gatto, Gadwal and Dharoo...
Satyam Constructions Ltd. Vs. Govt. of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD261; 1998(6)ALT174
ORDERIn the writ petition the petitioner-Company assails the action of the respondents in rejecting all the tenders/ bids received pursuant to the tender notice dated 16-8-1993 including that of the petitionerafter having issued a letter of acceptance on 25-6-1994 accepting its bid and calling upon the petitioner to enter into an agreement, as arbitrary, illegal and void and seeks a consequential direction to the respondents to award the contract to it as per the letter of acceptance and to pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper.2. There is not much controversy over the facts. The work in question, which is designated as Package L6-15, is a part of the various developmental works envisaged under AP II Irrigation Project which are to be executed with the financial assistance (loan or credit) provided by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank). Tenders for this work were invited by the third respondent (Superintending Engineer) by the ...
G. Gurunadha Reddy Vs. Apsrtc, Musheerabad and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD297; 1998(5)ALT730
ORDER1. Some times, big questions are raised in small and simple cases. This is one of such cases. Arguments based on Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution were addressed to the Court explicitly, and the arguments based on Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution implicitly, to assail the action of the second respondent dated 27-9-1998 in issuing the tender notification calling for tenders for allotment of the Public Telephone Booth in Central bus station, Tirupathi.2. The facts arc simple and they are: After calling for the tenders from the eligible persons, the petitioner was allotted a space in the central bus station, Timpathi to run a Public Telephone Booth as licensee for a period of sic years with effect from 17-11-1992 on payment of monthly licence fee of Rs.1080/-for the period from 17-11-1992 to 16-11-1995 and at the rate of Rs. 1296/- per month for the period commencing from 17-11-1995 or 30% of the commission which the petitioner receives from the Telephone department, whichev...
Muthineni Krishna Rao and Others Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD378; 1998(5)ALT772
ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. These writ petitions relate to service jurisprudence and raise several important questions of law, both Constitutional and statutory. After the decision of the Supreme Court in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, MR. 1997 SC 1125,* the validity of several provisions of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal Act') is challenged.2. Two legal practitioners have filed writ petitions WP Nos,21329 and 21439 of 1997 questioning the constitutional validity of the provisions of the Tribunal Act. They got standing of 13 years and 20 years respectively at the Bar. Tliey are the aspirants for either the Office of the Vice-Chairman or Member of the Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'). The attack on the provisions of the Tribunals Act is on the touch-stone of independence of judiciary with regard to tenure of appointment as also on the service conditions upon the independence of judiciary.3. There ...
Challa Rajendra Prasad Vs. Asian Coffee Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-1998
Reported in: [2000]100CompCas689(AP); (1999)2CompLJ46(AP)
Krishna Saran Shrivastav, J. 1. This order shall dispose of C. A. No. 535 of 1998 for postponing the meeting of the shareholders to be held on October 23, 1998. 2. In C. A. No. 453 of 1998, it was ordered on September 17, 1998, that the meeting' of the shareholders of Asian Coffee Limited should be held on October 23, 1998, at Hotel Taj Residency, Hyderabad, at 11.30 a.m. for approving the scheme of amalgamation of the other four companies with this company. Vilas Afzul Purkar, advocate, with his consent, was appointed as the chairman for conducting the said meeting and to report on the proceedings to this court on November 9, 1998. It was directed that notice of the meeting should be published in one issue of the English daily, Decani Chronicle, and one issue of the Telugu daily, Eenadu, in all the editions.3. On September 28, 1998, notice to all the shareholders was sent under certificate of posting from Bangalore. Notices were also published in newspapers in pursuance of the aforeme...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gogineni Tobacco Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-1998
Reported in: [1999]238ITR970(AP)
S.V. Maruthi, J.1. This petition is filed by the Revenue under Sec-tion 256(2) of the Income tax Act, 1961.2. The facts in brief are as follows :The assessee derived income from tobacco trade. For the assessment year 1992-93, it has filed return of income on December 30, 1992, admit ting a loss of Rs. 8,55,137 after deducting the carry forward loss of Rs. 42,59,952 from the income of Rs. 34,27,372. While filing the return, the assessee has not quantified the deductions under Section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act, because of the loss admitted by the company. Subsequently, it has filed a revised return claiming deduction of Rs. 34,14,814 under Section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act from the current year's income and requested that the unabsorbed business loss of Rs. 20,45,751 and the unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 21,16,890 be carried forward to the subsequent years. While processing the return of income, no deduction under Section 80HHC was allowed as after the setting off of the unabsorbed ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »