Andhra Pradesh Court June 1998 Judgments

Hercules Engineering Industries Vs. V. Gangireddy

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant. Though the respondent was served he is not present and no representation is there on his behalf. 2. We do not find any basis for setting aside the refund of Rs. 630/- directed by the Hyderabad District Forum in its order dated 29.5.1997 in O.P. No. 670/1995 questioned in this appeal by the opposite party in that O.P. The learned Counsel for the appellant accepts that it was served notice and yet no version/counter was filed on its behalf. From the record of the District Forum we find that notice was served on the appellant in the District Forum in September, 1995 itself and thereafter the matter was coming up for counter from 6.12.1995 on wards and finally on 26.5,1997 the District Forum noted that no counter was filed and heard the complainant and finally disposed of the matter by order dated 29.5.1997. Thus the appellant had more than one and half years time for filing counter. In the absence of the counter t...

Rajashree Oils and Extractions Vs. Deputy Commissioner (Ct), Kurnool a ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(5)ALD209; 1998(5)ALT9

ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J.1. The reference to the Full Bench is made by Mr. Justice M.N.Rao and Mr. Justice T.N.C. Rangarajan as they were at that time expressing a doubt as to the correctness of the judgment inState of Andhra Pradesh v. M/s Jayanti Oil Mills Private Limited, (1995) 20 APSTJ 255. The facts in brief are as follows:2. The assessee is a dealer in groundnut oil. It has a Solvent Extract Plant at Guntakal where it extracts groundnut oil from groundnut oil cake which has already suffered tax. On the footing that such oil fells within the Entry 24(b) in the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (for short 'the Act') the assessee has paid tax only at the rate of 2 1/2 paise in the rupee and assessments have been completed on that basis for the assessment year 1993-94. However, the impugned notices have been issued for bringing the said sales of groundnut oil within the scope of Entry 24(a) on the ground that the oil has been extracted not from the groundnut but...

Singareni Colleries Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. J. Vijaya and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

K. Ranga Rao, Member: 1. The Collery Manager, Goleti-II-Incline, Singareni Colleries Company Limited, Goleti Village, Rebbena Mandal of Adilabad District, the 3rd opposite party and the General Manager, Singareni Colleries Company Limited, Bellampally of Adilabad District, the 4th opposite party have preferred this appeal questioning the order dated 19.2.1998 passed by the Adilabad District Forum in O.P. No. 178/1997, directing them to pay to the complainant the double accident benefit payable under Policy No. 682851593 obtained by the complainants husband with interest @ 15% per annum from the date of the death of the husband of the complainant till the date of realisation within a period of one month apart from directing the Life Insurance Corporation of India officers, opposite parties 1 and 2 to pay to the complainant the double accident benefits due under policies bearing Nos. 680279465, 680464862 and 680835577 together with interest @ 15% per annum from the date of death of the h...

Govt. of A.P. Vs. Dinde Kanakamma and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(5)ALD436; 1998(5)ALT171

ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. These Writ Appeals arise out of a common judgment of the learned single Judge rendered in a batch of writ petitions wherein the learned Judge upheld the orders passed by the DistrictJudges on the appeals presented to them under sub-section (2-E) of Section 44 of the A.P. Forest Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), The appeals were preferred by the persons whose vehicles (Lorries) were confiscated by the Authorised Officer in exercise of power under sub-section (2-A) of Section 44 together with the timber/forest produce which the vehicles were carrying, on the ground that forest offences were committed in respect thereof.2. On appeal under sub-section (2-E) of Section 44 of the Act, the District Judges set aside the orders of confiscation of vehicles subject to the condition of the petitioners paying within the stipulated period a sum of money equivalent to the value of the illicit timber seized or double the value thereof as 'compounding fee'. The...

Rajinder Steels Limited Vs. Macherla Narsaiah

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. We find that the question in this appeal is covered by the order of the National Commission dated 8.10.1993 in M/s. Usha Rectifier Corporation (I) Limitedv. Dr. K. Dattatreye Rao,Order dated 8.10.1993 in R.P. No. 208/1993, in favour of the appellant and against the respondent/ complainant. The complainant had approached the Nizamabad District Forum for compensation for the loss suffered by him due to the delay in issuance of shares to him in respect of the convertible debentures allotted to him for which he paid the full amount though with some delay. The District Forum held that in respect of 350 shares allotted under Part-B of the debentures there was a delay and therefore there was deficiency in service on the part of the appellant/opposite party. The question is whether the dispute raised is within the jurisdiction of the District Forum. The National Commission in M/s. Usha Rectifier Corporation (I) Limited v. Dr. K. Dattatreye Rao (supra), held as fo...

Desk to Desk Courier and Cargo Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mrs. Sudesh Kumar

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. This appeal is preferred by the opposite party in C.C.No.331 of 1994 on the file of Visakhapatnam District Forum questioning its order dated 21.3.1996 allowing the said complaint and awarding compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and costs of Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant, who is the respondent in this appeal. The question raised by the appellant is whether more than the stipulated compensation can be directed to be paid by a courier in case of non-delivery of the consignment entrusted to it for delivery to the consignee. 2. In the present case the undisputed facts are that the appellant is running a courier service and has a branch at Visakhapatnam; the complainant entrusted a letter on 18.2.1994 (which according to her contained a demand draft dated 15.2.1994 for Rs. 1,00,000/-) to the appellant for carriage to Pune and delivery to one Dr. R.K. Sharma; at the time of entrustment the contents of the letter were not disclosed to the appellant and the letter was n...

Chief Engineer, Roads and Buildings, Erramanzil, Hyd. and ors. Vs. R.K ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(4)ALD413; 1998(4)ALT282

ORDERUmesh Chandra Banerjee, CJ1. It appears that is a delay of 328 days in the matter of representation of the appeal. Be it noted that there is also a delay of 39 days in the matter of filing of the appeal. Assuming we accept the submission of the learned Advocate appearing in support of the appeal and condone the delay of 39 days, but there isno explanation whatsoever in regard to the delay of 328 days for representation of the appeal. The appeal was presented after some delay before the Department The department returned the same by reason of certain defects therein. The explanation offered is that there was heavy rush in the Department and by reason of non-availability of the materials, the defects could not be cured within 328 days. This is not an acceptable explanation. The Limitation Act prescribed certain period of limitation and on the expiry of which the right of appeal stands extinguished and by reason wherefore, the other party stands vested with some right which cannot be...

Sarwotham Ispat Limited and anr. Vs. Government of India, Ministry of ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(6)ALT15; 1999(105)ELT550(AP)

Umesh Chandra Banerjee, C.J.1. In these two writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus declaring Rule 97 ZO 3 of Notification No. 27/97, Central Excise (N.T.), dated 25-7-1997 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, void and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have also prayed for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to levy excise duty on the petitioners by giving credit to the power cut imposed on them by the third respondent and pass such other order as is deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.2. The contextual facts depict that the petitioners are induction furnaces units engaged in the manufacture of Mild Steel ingots which is otherwise an excisable commodity .The manufacturing process of the petitioners involve melting of mild steel scrap in the furnace by heating with the help of electricity. It is a continuous process and in a day about 10 heats would be required for the purpose of ...

Sri Vasavi Cold Retreads Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [1998]111STC208(AP)

Umesh Chandra Banerjee, C.J.1. This writ petition is directed against withdrawal of exemption of sales tax holiday as declared by the State Government.2. Be it noted that the petitioners' industry is a retreading industry and started operation from October 1, 1992. The respondent-authorities, however, refused, while granting other incentives as is allowable under the present law, to grant tax holiday by reason of a notification dated April 25, 1991 as has been contended by the learned Advocate appearing for the State-respondents. The learned Advocate also contended that the notification is categorical as regards the nonavailability of exemption in terms of the notification dated April 25, 1991 read with G.O. Ms. No. 498, dated October 16, 1989.3. Be it placed on record that admittedly similar retreading units are having the tax-holiday whereas the petitioner-unit has not been able to obtain such a benefit and it is by reason of such a deprivation that this writ petition has been moved ...

Sri Andhra Finance Vs. Palacherla Paparao and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. The appellant was the opposite party in O.P. No. 71/1995 on the file of East Godavari District Forum at Kakinada. It is a partnership firm. The three respondents were the complainants in that O.P. The first respondent was the husband of Palacheria Rajya Venkata Lakshmi (Venkata Lakshmi) and the second and third respondents (second and third complainants) are their son and daughter respectively. 2. According to the respondents, Venkata Lakshmi deposited in all a sum of Rs. 65,000/- with the appellant firm on various dates in the year 1990. She died on 24.12.1992 leaving the respondents as her only legal heirs. There were some disputes between the partners of the appellant firm and the same were settled and the amount due to the respondents was settled at Rs. 1,66,714/- on 24.9.1994. As per the agreement arrived at between the respondents and the appellant, the appellant should pay the said amount by way of draft in the name of the respondents and the latte...