Andhra Pradesh Court December 1998 Judgments

Sane Group of Companies, Hyderabad Vs. Chandra Raja Kumari, President, ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(2)ALD262; 1999(1)ALT600

ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. The writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.18877 of 1977. Similar questions arise in Writ Petition No.27507 of 1997 and as such, it is posted along with this writ appeal.2. Several aspects dealt with by the learned single Judge are not so much necessary for adjudication of the case. Concisely speaking, the complaint of the Voluntary Organisations propounding the cause of the women is the objection raised to the Beauty Contest which was to be held in the City. Their complaint is that Beauty Contests are unconstitutional offending Articles 14, 21 and 51-A(e) of the Constitution of India and are also repugnant to the International Conventions, Covenants and Resolutions of the United Nations and Conferences on Women. Invocation of all the above provisions, be it legal Conventions or Covenants, are on the premise that the Beauty Contests are opposed to decency, public morality and dignity of women in gen...

State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Gold Star Engineering Enterprises

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [2000]119STC343(AP)

ORDER1. The Tribunal on a perusal of the invoices found that the sales turnover relates to items like, brass wire, welding cable, gas cutter, with standard accessories, welding hose pipe, aluminium winding cable, cable socket, hose pipe, cutting nozzle, hose clips, etc., and, therefore, they do not fall under entry 141 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as entry 141 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, relates to all kinds of welding electrodes and rods. The Tribunal also held that these items fall under entry 83 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as parts of the machinery.We do not see any infirmity in the order of the Tribunal and hence the tax revision case is dismissed....

John Sunny Varghese Vs. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-i

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. This is a frivolous complaint preferred by the complainant who claims to be a Cost Accountant. He has preferred this complaint against the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hyderabad-I on the ground that he had preferred two complaints on 23.9,1998, that they were given SR. Nos. 2563 and 2564 and that no further action was taken by way of directing notices to the opposite party even by the date the complainant approached this Commission by way of the present complaint dated 25.11.1998. It is no doubt a grievance which we take note of to act on the administrative side by calling for an explanation from the Serishtadar of the Hyderabad District For um-I. The complainant need not have preferred complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (the Act for short). He could have filed a revision petition to this Commission which has administrative control over the District Fora under Sub-section (2) of Section 24-B of the Act Section 24-B was insert...

Nataraj Bore-well Services Vs. Water Development Society and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. Section 151 CPC has no application to the present proceedings because Section 151 refers to the inherent powers of a Civil Court being exercised by long practice. The Fora and the Commissions constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (the Act for short) are not Civil Courts and the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 are not attracted to them except totheextent provided under Sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the Act. We may observe that in Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Private Limited, (1996) 5 SCC 550=1997 (2) CPR 187 (SC), the Supreme Court held as follows : The judiciary in India also possesses inherent power, specially under Section 151, Civil Procedure Code, to recall its judgment or order if it is obtained by fraud on Court. In the case of fraud on a party to the suit or proceedings, the Court may direct the affected party to file a separate suit for setting aside the decree obtained by fraud. Inherent powers are powers ...

Pondur Milk Producers Co.Operative Society Vs. Authority Under Minimum ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD435; 1999(1)ALT494; [1999(82)FLR192]; (1999)IILLJ286AP

1. Same questions of fact and law are involved in these two writ petitions. Stay has been granted by this Court and vacate stay applications have been filed. The controversy is very short, the writ petitions already stand admitted, Counters have been filed and the learned Counsel for the parties have been heard at length, therefore the main petitions are decided by this judgment.2. These petitions are filed against the orders passed by the Authority under the Minimum Wages Act. By the order under challenge, the authority allowed the claim of the respondent and directed payment of difference of wages as it was found that minimum wages had not been paid. The order is challenged mainly on two grounds.(1) that the claim itself was time barred, and(2) that, in terms of Schedule to Minimum Wages Act, 1948 the writ petitioner is not an employer subject to Minimum Wages Act.3. It is true that the claim had been filed beyond time and an application for condonation of delay had also been filed b...

B. Parameswaran Vs. State

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD727; 1999(1)ALT(Cri)307; 1999CriLJ2059

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15-10-1994 in CC No.5 of 1993 on the file of the Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Visakhapalnam under which the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 13(a)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.2. The accused, Parameswaran @ Parameswara Rao was a clerk-cum-typist inthe Divisional Audit Office, South Central Railway at Vijayawada. PW1, K.K. Venkata Ramana, had earlier worked as a cleaner under a Railway Contractor from 1987 to September, 1989 in the Vegetarian Canteen of Vijayawada Railway Station and later worked as a helper in the Vegetarian Restaurant in the Railway Canteen in Guntur Railway Station from March, 1990 to December, 1991. For appointment as casual labourers in the vegetarian restaurant of the Railways al...

A. Narayana Rao Vs. Asst. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Sec ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD614; 1999(1)ALT587

1. In all these writ petitions common questions of law are involved and hence, therefore they are decided by a common judgment.2. The question that arises for consideration in all these writ petitions is whether any permission of the authorities is required for reducing the seating capacity in the contract carriage vehicles.3. The factual matrix in the nutshell is that the petitioners are owning the Light Motor Vehicles having seating capacity of more than 6 excluding the driver. In some cases, the petitioners have purchased the vehicles from the manufacturers which are having seating capacity of more than 6 passengers excluding the driver. They intend to run the vehicles as contract carriages and also under All India Tourist Taxi Cabs Permits under Section 88(9) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The stand of the petitioners is that they have effected necessary adoptions in the seating arrangement by reducing the seating to 6 excluding the driver so as to give better tourist facilities and th...

NazeemuddIn Vs. State of A.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD685; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)190; 1999CriLJ1773

1. This appeal arises out of judgment of the Special Sessions Judge for trial of cases under SCs and STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Act dated 8-7-1993 rendered in CC No.14 of 1993 under which the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of SCs and STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four weeks.2. The facts relevant to this appeal may be stated briefly as follows:On 14-12-1992, the victim Dappu Bujjamma of Digwal village belonging to Scheduled Caste was sent along with her brother-in-law Rajkumar for grazing cattle to the field of Edugollu. At about 5 p.m., she went to take drinking water and while returning along Jawar field of Uppari Chandraiah, the accused, who is a muslim, not belonging to Scheduled Caste came behind her, caught hold of her hands, dragged her to jawar fields. On her hue and cry, he...

Apsrtc Vs. Dy. Transport Commissioner and Secretary, Rta, Guntur and o ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(2)ALD113; 1999(1)ALT561

ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, ACJ 1. Aggrieved by the judgment in WP No.29447 of 1998, the present writ appeal is filed by the A.P. State Road Transport Corporation. The 2nd and 3rd respondents herein who have pucca stage carriage permits to ply their buses on the town service route-Bapatla to Narasayapalem via Jammulapalem, had applied for grant of variation of route by issuing temporary permit to ply the buses on the deviated route-Bapatta to Narasayapalem via Kankatapalem. Such request was made for the reason that the road between Jammulapalem and Narasayapalem (3.1 Kms.) was badly damaged and not fordable at present. The Regional Manager of APSRTC objected to the grant of temporary permits to ply the buses on deviated route on the ground that the entire route is overlapping the notified/nationalised route. It was pointed out that the grant of variation violates the conditions of approved scheme framed in G.O.No.291, dated 19-9-1998. The Regional Manager stated in his objections that A...

Reddi Varamaiah Vs. Pereddi Nagi Reddi

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(2)ALD265; 1999(1)ALT603

ORDER1. The respondent though served not engaged any Counsel. His name was called out and none appeared for him. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. The petitioner before this Court is the defendant. The respondent-plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs.1,783.60 ps. due on a pronote and other legal charges andcosts. It is the case of the respondent-plaintiff that the defendant took loan of Rs. 1,400/- at Nandikotkur on 28-5-1992 and executed suit pronote dated 28-5-1992 under Ex.Al, agreeing to repay the said amount with interest at the rate of 24% per annum on demand. The plaintiff stated that in spite of several demands made by him, the defendant did not pay the amount. However, on 25-5-1995 the defendant sent an amount of Rs.400/- through his wife Neelamma. She made an endorsement on the said pronote having paid Rs.400/-. Thereafter the balance amount was not paid. The plaintiff, under those circumstances, got issued lawyer's notice vide Ex.A2 dated 5-6-1997 and in ...