Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Executive Club Formed by Lalitha Real Estates Pvt. Ltd., Vijayawada an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD126; 1998(2)ALD(Cri)569; 1998(2)ALT(Cri)207; 1999CriLJ35
ORDER1. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.406/97 of P.S., Machavaram, Vijayawada City (On the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada). 2. Petitioner Nos. 2 to 52 are the accused in the said crime. The allegations levelled against them, may briefly, be noticed. hi the charge-sheet it is alleged that Petitioner Nos.2 to 49, who are Al to A-48 are the residents of Vijayawada and they are landlords and business people in Vijayawada City. It is also stated that all of them are Members and guests of the Executive Club, Vijaj-awada, first petitioner herein; whereas petitioner Nos.50 to 52 arc working as Cashiers in the card rooms of the first petitioner-Club. 3. On 13-9-1997 at about 9-30 P.M., the ACP-I and ACP-II along with other officers and mediators, on receipt of credible information, proceeded to the first petitioner-Club and raided the card rooms in the presence of the mediators and fo...
Banguru Ramathulasamma Vs. Yedem Masthan Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD502; 1998(4)ALT796
ORDER1. This revision Petition is filed by the first defendant in OS No. 284 of 1989 on the file of the District Munsif, Gudur questioning the impugned order dated 22-2-1996 holding that the disputed document dated 20-11-1981 sought to be marked by the plaintiff as evidence on his behalf was held to be an agreement of sale and not a sale deed and therefore admissible in evidence.2. The first respondent herein is the plaintiff in the suit which was filed for the relief of the permanent injunction relating to the suit property against the present revision petitioner, who is the first defendant and also against the second and third defendants in the suit. The plaintiff is alleged to have purchased the suit property from second and third defendants under the disputed document dated 20-11-1981 which is described as an agreement of sale. During the course of evidence of the plaintiff the said document was sought to be marked as evidence on his behalf and the learned Counsel appearing for the...
Sitani Textiles and Fabrics (P) Ltd Vs. Asst. Collector of Customs and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD637; 1998(5)ALT249; [1999]98CompCas165(AP); 1999(106)ELT296(AP)
ORDERS.V. Maruthi 1. This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the order of the 1st respondent dated 21-2-1994 as illegal, arbitrary and unjust. 2. The facts in brief are as follows: One M/s. Dakshin Fabrics Ltd., has taken a loan from A.P. Industrial Development Corporation, a financial institution. Since there was default in payment of loan the unit of Dakshin Fabrics Ltd., was brought to sale under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 on 4-2-1992. The petitioner participated in the auction and became the highest bidder and the sale was knocked down in his favour on 30-3-1992. The A.P. Industrial Development Corporation confirmed the sale in favour of the petitioner for Rs.76.00 lakhs and had issued proceedings to the said effect. On 31-3-1992 the petitioner paid Rs.15.20 lakhs being 20% of the sale price. The petitioner was effecting repairs to the plant and machinery after taking possession of the same. On 21-2-1994, the 1st respondent Assistan...
General Manager, National Bank for Agricultural and Rural Development, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD578; 1998(6)ALT68; (1999)ILLJ1346AP
ORDER1. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction more particularly one in the nature writ of mandamus declaring the order passed by the first respondent namely the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-I Hyderabad, in ID No.36 of 1997 dated 6-3-1998, refusing to permit Ms. Sudha, an Advocate, who is said to be the Vice-President of the Organisation of the Management Union, to represent on behalf of the petitioner under Section 36(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. The facts giving rise for filing of this writ petition are as under:The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, has referred the following dispute under Sections 10(1)(d) and 2(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter called as 'the Act') to the first respondent-Tribunal for adjudication.'Whether the action of the Management NABARD, Hyderabad in terminating the services of P.S. Balasubramanayam with effect from 9-12-1984 without following the provisions of Section 25-F under ID Act is justified? I...
Pattabhirama Sastry C. Vs. Bank of Baroda and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)ALT803; (2001)IIILLJ141AP
ORDERS.R. Nayak, J.1. The petitioner is an officer in Middle Management Grade Scale-II in the establishment of Bank of Baroda. The validity of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner ultimately culminating in imposition of the penalty of reduction by three stages in time scale in Middle Management Grade Scale-II with effect from February 25, 1989 at the hands of the Chairman and the Managing Director of the Bank, who is the reviewing authority under Regulation 18 of the Bank of Baroda Officer Employees (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations. 1976, for short 'D & A Regulations' is assailed in the writ petition. The petitioner has also sought for declaration that the action of the respondents in recovering the Professional Qualification Allowance (PQA) for the period from July 1, 1989 as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the respondents to continue the payment of PQA duly refunding the amounts already recovered.2. The petitioner joined the servic...
Lloyds Finance Ltd. Vs. Kitti Steels Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1998
Reported in: [2001]103CompCas208(AP); (1999)2CompLJ406(AP)
Krishna Saran Shrivastav, J 1. Heard learned counsel for both sides on admission. 2. It is an admitted fact that the respondent-company had taken on lease the arc welding machines and arc welding generators on a rent of Rs. 89,60,000 for a period of five years through agreement dated September 25, 1994. The lease rent was payable in 20 quarterly instalments of Rs. 4,48,003 and the respondent-company has also issued post-dated cheques against the quarterly lease rents. The respondent-company paid 7 quarterly lease rents. 3. The petitioner-company alleges that the respondent-company did not pay the lease rents amounting to Rs. 15,92,012, that is for three quarters including interest at the rate of 36 per cent, per annum. The respondent-company was liable to pay an amount of Rs. 19,03,773 and the balance of amount of lease rent amounting to Rs. 40,32,027 has also become recoverable. The petitioner-company has sent a notice under Section 434(1)(a) of the Companies Act for payment of the sa...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Trustees of Sahebzadi Anwar Begum Trust ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD747; 1998(6)ALT806; [1998]234ITR282(AP)
ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. This Wealth-tax Reference case has been placed before the Full Bench on an order of reference made by the Division Bench consisting of Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri. J and Parvatha Rao, J. The Division Bench found an apparent conflict between the two decisions of this Court - RC No.67 of 1969 (unreported) and Commissioner of Wealth-Tax v. H.E.H. Nizam's Sahebzadi Anwar Begum Trust, : [1981]129ITR796(AP) . Both these cases arose between the same parties.2. The assessment years involved in this reference case are 1970-71 to 1975-76. The following questions of law were referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, on a direction given by the High Court, at the instance of Revenue:'(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee had not beneficial interest in the entire corpus regarding the shares fund liable to be assessed to Wealth-tax under Section 21(1)? (2) Whe...
Bhupinder Investment Company (P) Ltd. Vs. Midland Industries Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD117
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel of both sides on admission. 2. It is not disputed before me that the petitioner had advanced a sum of Rs. 25,00.000/- to the respondent/company on interest at the rate of 30 per cent per annum. It is also an admitted fact that the respondent/ company had paid an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-through cheque dated 30-12-1995 and Rs-62,151/- through cheque against interest accrued upto 15-1-1996. The respondent/ company has also deposited an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- in the Bank account of the applicant on 19-4-1996. The petitioner on 15-4-1996 issued a legal notice to the respondent/company demanding a sum of Rs.21,80,333/-. After receiving this letter, the respondent/company sent a reply admitting the claim of the applicant, but alleging that it had a feeling that the applicant was interested in settling the matter amicably but had resorted to legal route. 3. The defence of the respondent/ company is that it has submitted a schedule of repayment of the amount du...
V. Gopalam Vs. Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Rajendranag ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD364
1. In this writ petition, the appointment of 2nd respondent as Registrar of Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad, is assailed.2. The facts relevant for the case arc that a notification was issued by the University on 17-4-1997 calling for the applications for appointment to the post of Registrar in the scale of Rs.7070-10100 precribing certain qualifications and other requirements with regard to experience. The petitioner along with others including the 2nd respondent submitted applications and consequently a Selection Committee was constituted and selections were held on 25-6-1997. A panel was prepared. by the Selection Committee wherein the 2nd respondent was placed at Sl.No.1 and the petitioner was placed at Sl.No2. The said panel was placed before the appropriate committee namely the Board of Management and the said Board considered the selections made by the Board and approved the panel without any modification. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent was issued with the ...
Vemula Shanker Vs. Nakod Pandarinath and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD252; 1998(6)ALT133
1. This second appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code has been preferred against the Judgment and decree dated 4-12-1989 passed in AS No.10 of 1989 on the file of the District Judge, Adilabad, confirming the judgment and decree dated 18-4-1989 passed in OS No.55 of 1984 on the file of the District Munsif, Adilabad. The appellant herein is the defendant and the respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said suit OS No.55 of 1984.2. The respondent-plaintiff filed that suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 17-1-1981 (Ex.A1) against the appellant-defendant and in the alternative for return of the advance money paid by him at the time of execution of the said agreement of sale. The trial Court decreed the suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale. The first appellate Court confirmed the said judgment and decree of the trial Court. Aggrieved of that, the defendant has come up with this second appeal.3. The only substantial question of law rai...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »