Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(3)ALD373; 1998(3)ALT295
1. Heard both sides.2. The third party-petitioner has filed this revision aggrieved by the orders passed in E.A.No.128/93 in E.P.No. 51/92 in O.S.No. 699/90 on the file of XI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, dated 15th March, 1996 rejecting the petitioner's application filed under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C.3. Mr. M.A.Shakoor, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was in occupation of Ihe premises bearing Municipal No. 11-2-165 and 166 situated in Mylargadda, Secunderabad, in his own right as tenant of the 2nd respondent. Earlier, he had fileda suit in O.S.319/1993 on 12-10-1993 against the respondents on the file of the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad and obtained orders of 'Slants-quo' in I.A.No.1868/1993, dated 12-10-1993 and he brought the Status-quo order passed by the learned Judge to the notice of the Court and that he is not bound by the decree which is sought' to be executed in respect of the premises on the ground ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1998]258ITR503(AP)
T.N.C. Rangarajan, J.1. In these cases, certain common questions have been referred by the Tribunal. In R.C. Nos. 106 of 1989, 107 of 1989, 116 of 1989, 133 of 1989, 134 of 1989 and 229 of 1990; the following three questions have been referred :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in holding that the probable estate duty payable on the death of the life tenant has to be taken into account and the value of the property will be diminished by that for charge of wealth-tax in the hands of the remaindermen?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the rate of interest adopted by the assessee's actuary is correct?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the rate of interest as given in the WT Rules for valuation of life interest is applicable to the present case where the corpus is jewellery which is appreciable asse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(2)ALD689; 1998(3)ALT175
1. The Writ Petition is filed seeking writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents not to permit the 5th respondent to set up Rice Mill at Akiveedu village or any other place within the residential area of Akiveedu Gram Panchayat by setting aside the resolution passed by the 1st respondent Gram Panchayat dated 19-10-1996 as also the permission granted by the 3rd and 4th respondent dated 15-9-1996 and 25-4-1996 respectively. 2. According to the averments in the Writ Petition- the permission was given by the authorities for construction of the Rice Mill in the residential area of Akiveedu Gram Panchayat where there are pucca residential houses. Further, the 1st petitioner obtained permission for construction of a hospital and they also have residential house in that area The 5th respondent was proposing to construct a Rice Mill in S.No.334/12,334/13,335/1 and 335/2 of Akiveedu village abutting the Kalavapudi- Ganapavaram Road with 74 H.P. Electric Motor and 82.5 KVH Generator. Coming to kn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(2)ALD714; 1998(2)ALT331
ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J 1. In the Writ Petition the contention of the petitioner is that the seigniorage fee collected by the Government from the persons permitted to quarry in the village under the provisions of the A.P.Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 should exclusively be allocated to the petitioner-Gram Panchayat The argument is based on sub-section (2) of Section 79 of the A.P.Gram Panchayats Act. The learned single Judge following the Division Bench decision in Gram Panchayat, Maddur v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1997 (6), ALD 49 (DB) (of which one of us: viz., P.Venkatarama Reddi, J was a member) dismissed the Writ Petition. The learned Counsel for the appellant-petitioner, while fairly conceding that the point is covered by the above said decision, however contends that in view of the definition of 'Gram Panchayat' in Section 2(17) of the A.P. Gram Panchayat Act/A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, the view taken by the Division Bench requires reconsideration. We do not see how the a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(3)ALD620; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)641; 1998(2)ALT(Cri)57
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. The sole accused in Sessions Case No. 152 of 1994 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Krishna District is the appellant. He was tried for the charges punishable under Sections 380, 354, 451 and 302 1PC. Out of the four charges, the appellant-accused was found guilty of the charges under Sections 354, 451 and 302 1PC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years on the first count, three years rigorous imprisonment on the second count and imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,0007- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months under the third count. The appellant-accused was, however, found not guilty of the charge under Section 380 IPC. As against the conviction and sentence as indicated above, the present appeal is preferred before us by the appellant-accused.2. The gravemen of the charges against the accused is that on 11th February, 1993 around 2,00 p.m. the accused tresspassed into the house of the deceased Sa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(5)ALT370
ORDERG. Bikshapathy, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner-Saint Joseph Education Society, Anantapur, seeking a Writ of Certiorari for quashing the order of the respondent-Sri Krishnadevaraya University, represented by its Registrar, Anantapur, Anantapur District, in No. SKU/Exams/36/97, dated 16-01-1998.2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner-Society is, running both High School and Degree College. Right from the inception of the College, it was being allotted examination centre in respect of degree examinations. There was no complaint whatsoever against the College. The examinations for the degree classes for March, 1997 were held without any complaint whatsoever. However, the Controller of Examinations of the respondent sent a letter dated 7-7-1997 to the Principal, CVLNR Degree College, Anantapur to collect the explanation from the concerned for taking further action. The respondent-University informed the petitioner about the alleged malpractices that hav...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(2)ALD629; 1998(3)ALT146
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus declaring, the billing by the respondents in respect of supply of energy for the supply of water under H.T.Category I, as illegal and direct the respondents to charge the same under H.T.Category VI. The writ petition also prayed for further relief by suitably directing the respondents to fix meters for street lighting and charge accordingly.2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously contended that the petitioner's water processing unit can be charged only under Category VI and not under Category I, as is being done by the respondent- Electricity Board. He took me through the Category I and Category VI in support of his arguments. The learned Counsel appearing for the Electricity Board seriously contended that the electricity consumed by the Warangal Municipal Corporation for the purpose of water processing unit is liable to be charged under Category I only and accordingly, the billing was being done for all...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(3)ALD685; 1998(3)ALT607
1. Heard both the Counsel.2. This CRP is filed by the petitioner alleging to be the owner of the suit premises on the ground that the respondent has committed wilful default in payment of rents. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner and landlord of the suit premises and that he has filed RCC 15/89 before the Rent Controller for eviction of the respondent on the ground of wilful default in payment of rents. Thereafter, the petitioner filed IA No.1143/1992 under Section 11(4) of Rent Control Act (for short 'the Act') praying to evict the respondent summarily from the suit premises on the ground that the respondent did not pay the rents since the date of filing of the rent control case. It is also submitted by him that there was a dispute with regard to the title of the suit premises between the petitioner and the third party and as such, he preferred OS 157/ 1982 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Machilipamam. It is further stated ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(2)ALD667; 1998(5)ALT117
ORDER1. All these three matters can be disposed of by a common order as they relate to the promotion to the post of Senior Assistant in the District Schedule Caste Cooperative Society Limited, Khammam (forshort 'the Society'), and the parties are referred in this order as they are arrayed in Writ Petition No. 14946 of 1996.2. One K.L.Narasimha Rao who is working as incharge Senior Assistant in the Engineering Wing of the Society, filed Writ Petition No.14946 of 1996, questioning the promotion of the 4th respondent S.Suryanarayana Sarma, who is no other than the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 14960 of 1996, as Senior Assistant vide proceedings Rc.No.Al/595/SC/90, dated 17-07-1996, of the Executive Director of the Society, by contending that he is the senior most among the categories of employees in the Society and in fact, working as incharge Senior Assistant since 1994. But, on the basis of the orders of this Court in Writ Petition 3631 of 1996, dated 29-02-1996, the 4th respondent ha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(2)ALD739; 1998(3)ALT244
ORDER1. The 2nd respondent i.e., Andhra Pradesh Commission for Backward Classes in refused to furnish a report of the sample survey which was got done by the Commission of Indian Statistical Institute, Hyderabad Branch, by stating that the document sought for does not fall within the perview of Regulalion-I of the (APCBC) regulations for supply of certified copies. Further, the Commission by a majority held that the same was meant for the use of the Commission and should not be made public. Hence, this writ petition.2. Heard both the learned Counsels.3. It is seen that the Commission addressed a letter to the Government staling that in order to decide the Social Backwardness of the Castes/Classes random socio-economic survey covering educational and economic backwardness is required. Accordingly he has sent the proposals to the Government to sanction the entrustment of conducting sample survey to die Directorate of Economics and Statistics. The Government after careful consideration, h...
Tag this Judgment!