Andhra Pradesh Court January 1999 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.
M.A.R.V.S. Sai Babu Vs. Commissioner and Registrar of Co.Op. Societies ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD319; 1999(2)ALT233
ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J. 1. Thewrit petitions have been filed questioning the action of the authorities, be it the Governmentor the District Collectors, in stalling the election to the Committees of the respective Co-operative Societies by invoking the power under Rule 22-AAA of A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules. The said rules have been framed by virtue of rule-making power under sub-section (1) of Section 130 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 which reads :'The Government may by notification published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette make rules for carrying out all or any of the purposes of this Act for the whole or any part of the Stale and for any class of societies.'2. Hitherto, the tenure of the Committees elected was three years, but the same has been increased to five years. The societies concerned in this batch of writ petitions had elected Committees to manage their respective societies, but their term had expired and as such, elections were to be conducted. The ele...
Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Gaddam Limbareddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALT294
N.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and decree dated 15-11-1994 passed in O.P. No. 192 of 1990 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, Nizamabad.2. The State has acquired structures, open sites, trees, wells etc., in an extent of Ac. 3.06 1/2 guntas situated at Sirpoor village, belonging to the claimants-respondents. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an Award on 28-2-1974 fixing the compensation as Rs. 1,71,619/- in toto. Having not satisfied with the said compensation, the claimants sought a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Accordingly a reference was made to the civil Court for determination as to the adequacy or otherwise of the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. During the pendency of the Proceedings in the lower Court, I.A. No. 710 of 1990 was filed by the respondents Nos. 11 to 48 seeking to implead them as parties to the proceedings. The said application was allowed by an order dt. 23-7-1...
Dr. K.T. Sampath Kumar Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-21-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD654; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)606; 1999(1)ALT722; 1999CriLJ1475
ORDER1. This revision is filed against the order passed in Crl.MP No. 1647 of 1996 in CC No.39 of 1994 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Markapur.2. The petitioner was charged for the offence punishable under Section 145, read with Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of Cr.PC. The allegation is that in MC No.7 of 1992 filed under Section 145 Cr.PC, LW3, by name Golamaru Venkata Narayana Reddy who was arrayed as 'B' party produced the xerox copy of the document purported to have been signed by the Collector giving permission tothe accused arrayed as 'A' party in the MC. The Revenue Divisional Officer before whom the proceedings were pending, referred that document to the Collector. The Collector said lhat he did not give such permission and his signature on the document is fabricated and he directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to take action against Dr. K. T. Sampath Kumar and also G. Venkata Narayana Reddy. Thereupon the Revenue Divisional Officer filed a complaint before the S....
Executive Officer, Gram Panchayat, T. Kothapalli and anr. Vs. Dadda Sa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-21-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD701; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)614; 1999(1)ALT607; 1999CriLJ1424
ORDER1. The criminal petition itself is disposed of with the consent of parties on merits.2. The petitioner challenging the order passed in MC No.3 of 1998. The said order is passed under Section 133 Cr.PC. Section 133 Cr.PC empowers passing of conditional order for removal of nuisance by the District Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government. However, Section 133 Cr.PC empowers only passing of orders in accordance with the provisions of the said section. The section in terms says that the Magistrate may make a conditional order requiring the person causing such alleged obstruction or nuisance etc., to remove the same within a time to be fixed in the order. It is only after passing of such order that further proceedings have to be taken by serving of the said order on the concerned person and person against whom such order is made has to comply the said order within the time specified. Consequence of his failur...
Dr. T. Rajeswari Vs. Vice-chancellor-cum-chairman, Sree Venkateswara U ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-21-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD69; 1999(2)ALT33
ORDER1. The appointment of 3rd respondent, that is, Smt. K. Vijayakumari, as Lecturer in Zoology Department in Sree Vcnkateswara University, Tirupati, vide proceedings E.11/2/89 Appointments, dated 17-2-1989, in a post earmarked for a scheduled caste candidate has been assailed. In other words, this Court is called upon to decided whether Smt. K. Vijayakumari, who belongs to forward community, by virtue of her marriage with a scheduled caste man acquires the social status of her husband to claim protective discrimination as envisaged under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India.2. The facts of this case are not in dispute. The 3rd respondent, daughter of one K. Ramachandra Reddy, seemed to have married one M. Rajeshwara Rao who belongs to scheduled caste and thereafter she started applying for appointment as a scheduled caste candidate by contending that by virtue of her marriage she acquired the caste of her husband. At the time when the 3rd respondent appeared before the 1st resp...
Hasmukh Champaklal Mehta Vs. Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyde ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD650; 1999(1)ALT699
ORDERK.B. Siddappa, J.1. This Writ Appeal is directed against the judgment passed in WPNo.l4018 of 1993.2. The Writ Petition was filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus seeking direction to the 1st respondent not to collect Court Fee from the petitioner on the Letters of Administration to,be issued in pursuance to the order dated 27-4-1993 in OP No.172 of 1993 on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in excess of the Court Fee prescribed under Article l(c)(viii) of the 1st Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh Court Fees & Suits Valuation Act, 1956.3. Stated briefly, the relevant facts are the following:The petitioner filed OP No.172 of 1993 under Section 232 of Indian Succession Act to grant letters of Administration for the last Will and Testament dated 29-11-1985 executed by his father who died on I -6-1991. The brothers and the only sisler of the petitioner who were impleaded filed affidavits and in their evidence stated that they have no objection for grant of ...
Udugula Yadagiri Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD674; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)625; 1999(1)ALT567; 1999CriLJ3532
1. This appeal arises out of the conviction of the appellant for the offence of contravention of Section 8(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act punishable under Section 20 of the said Act, for which the accused has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default to undergo imprisonment for two months by judgment dated 30-9-1993 in CCNo.51 of 1992 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge at Warangal.2. The charge against the accused is that the Sub-Inspector of Police (PW4) got some information that the accused was cultivating ganja plants in his land bearing survey No.518 of village Appalaraopet. In pursuance of the information, he requisitioned the services of the Revenue Inspector (PV I) and two panch witnesses, namely, PVs.2 and 3 and proceeded to a field purporting to be the Survey No.518 of the said village and found 209 plants of ganja in (hat field, lie got the plants plucked and preserved six p...
Chundru Sri Hari Rao Vs. Vijaya Engine Valves, Kakinada and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD89
ORDERK.B. Siddappa, J. 1. As common question of law arises in these two cases, they are disposed of by this common order.2. Criminal Petition No.3570 of 1995 is filed under Section 482 Cr.PC. to quash the proceedings in STC No.93 of 1995 on the file of IV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada.3. The matter came up before the learned Sri P. Ramakrishnam Raju, J with the following facts:The respondent company had filed STC No.93 of 1995 against the petitioner under Sections 622 and 630 of Companies Act before the IV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada. The petitioner's contention was that by virtue of G.O.Rt.No.734 Home (Courts-A) Department, dated 13-3-1981, a Special Court is constituted to deal with the offences arising out of certain enactments including the Companies Act. Therefore, the Judicial First Class Magistrate has no jurisdiction to try the case. In support of this contention the learned Counsel had relied upon the judgment in K.K. Maheswari v...
Commissioner of Gift-tax, Central Karnataka, Bangalore Vs. Mohammed Kh ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD170; 1999(2)ALT103
ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. In thisreference, the effect of the provision contained in Section 5(3) vis-a-vis Section 5(1)(viii) of the Gift Tax Act has to be considered.2. The assessee is an individual and his wife had gifted him an amount of Rs.25,000/- on 3-2-1972. On 30-10-1975, the assessee had in turn made a gift to his wife to the same quantum of Rs.25,000/-. The assessee's wife was not subjected to gift tax, but the assessee was made exigible to pay gift-tax for the gift amount of Rs.25,000/-made by him to his wife on 30-10-1975. The case of the assessee is that the gift amount made by his wife is now-way concerned with the gift he made and as such, Section 5(3) of the Gift Tax Act is not applicable and he should be exonerated of payment of gift tax. It is apt to extract both the provisions,which stood in the statute book before their repeal:'5.(1) Gift-tax shall not be charged under this Act in respect of gifts made by any person........... ........................ ............
Chandru Sri Hari Rao Vs. Vijaya Engine Valves and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)ALT772; [2000]37CLA57(AP); [2000]100CompCas750(AP)
K.B. Siddappa, J.1. As common question of law arises in these two cases, they are disposed of by this common order.2. Criminal Petition No. 3570 of 1995 is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the proceedings in S. T. C. No. 93 of 1995 on the file of the IVth Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada.3. The matter came up before the learned Shri P. Ramakrishnam Raju J. with the following facts :The respondent-company had filed S. T. C. No. 93 of 1995 against the petitioner under Sections 622 and 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act') before the IVth Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada. The petitioner's contention was that by virtue of G. 0. Rt. No. 734, Home (Courts-A) Department, dated March 13, 1981, a Special Court is constituted to deal with the offences arising out of certain enactments including the Companies Act. Therefore, the Judicial First Class Magistrate has no jurisdiction to try the case. In support of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »