Andhra Pradesh Court November 1999 Judgments

Hyderabad Industries Limited Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [2000]120STC91(AP)

P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal in not extending the time further for filing the 'D' forms, the present tax revision case is filed by the assessee. The Tribunal noted that despite the fact that the time was extended as a last chance till January 31, 1991 by an order dated January 11, 1991 passed in T.M.P. No. 4 of 1991, the petitioner failed to file the 'D' forms and, therefore, the Tribunal saw no valid grounds to extend the time beyond January 31, 1991.2. It is seen from the record that in the affidavit filed in support of the first petition for extension of time, the petitioner elaborately explained the circumstances under which the 'D' forms could not be obtained from the Kerala State authorities. The petitioner requested time up to March 31, 1991 for producing the 'D' forms. But, the Tribunal granted time up to January 31, 1991 only. It is further seen from the record that the 'D' forms were issued by the Kerala Water Authority, Trivandrum, on Feb...

Kumari Tanveer Fatima Vs. Registrar, N.T.R. University of Health Scien ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(6)ALT321

ORDERB.S.A. Swamy, J.1. The petitioner, a final year M.B.B.S., student filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to send her answer script/ paper in Opthalmology for final year examinations held in the month of April / May 1999, for re-valuation and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.2. By order dated 01-09-1999, while admitting the writ petition 1 directed the counsel for the respondent-University to produce the answer script of the petitioner in Opthalmology with Hall Ticket No. 9409137 for verification of the Court on payment of Rs. 5,000/- by way of demand draft drawn in favour of the Registrar, NTR University of Health Sciences, by the petitioner. Accordingly, the answer script was produced before this Court on 09-09-1999 and having prima facie satisfied that the paper was not properly valued, I directed the respondent-University to get the paper valued by ...

Sri Sai Pipe Co., Hyd. Vs. Engineer-in-chief Panchayat Raj, A.P., Hyd.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(1)ALD268; 2000(1)ALT650

1. The petitioner-Firm registered as a Small Scale Industry manufacturing pressure pipes. It is a Small Scale Industrial Undertaking as defined in Section 2(ii)(a) of Interest on delayed payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 (Act 32 of 1993). The aforesaid Act has been legislated for the encouragement and the benefit of the Small Scale Industries for the delayed payments to the Small Scale Industries.2. The petitioner entered into a rate contract agreement dated 2-2-1998 with the Engineer-in-Chief, Panchayat Raj, Engineering Department, Errum Manzil, Hyderabad, for the supply of AC Pressure Pipes and AC Couplings. As per Clause 5.1 of Special Conditions of the Contract, 98% of the value of the goods and the taxes in full shall be released by the consignee by Demand Draft within 15 days from the date of receipt of the material at Sub Divisional Stores and the remaining 2% balance shall be paid within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the e...

Capt. K.M. Saxena Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(3)ALT416

Motilal B. Naik, J.1. The party-in-person Capt. K.M. Saxena, who is aged about 54 years, also an Advocate, presented this writ petition against the respondents invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus to set aside the impugned order of arrest dated 26-10-1999 passed on the detenu- Lt. Col. S.S. Shekhar and for producing the detenu before this Court and to set him at liberty forthwith.2. Petitioner has stated in para 2 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that since there is no person at present in the family of the detenu Lt. Col. S.S. Shekhar to take up the cause of his unlawful arrest effected by the respondents, he has chosen to file the writ petition seeking the above relief as he is acquainted with the detenu and knows the facts of the case.3. It is alleged by the party-in-person in the writ petition that in the General Court Martial convened by the fourth respondent for t...

D.V. Mahesh Vs. Superintending Engineer and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(1)ALT779

ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. These two writ petitions i.e., W.P. No. 13972 of 1999 and 20762 of 1999 involve common questions of law founded on common application of legal principles and are thus heard together with the consent of the parties and disposed of by this common order. 2. Pursuant to a tender notification by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in respect of the work of formation of Reservoir across Seshugadda near Peddapalli village in Yelamanchili Mandal of Vizag District an agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the respondents No. 198-99 dt. 6-5-1998. 3. By the Tender Notice No. 1233 MM SD3 dt. 30-6-1999 issued by the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Visakhapatnam. Tenders were called for in respect of construction of an extra work i.e., Gorge portion earth work and Revetment arrangement from 210 meters to 300 meters which part of the work was initially entrusted to the petitioner in these cases under the agreement dt. 6-5-1998 already adverted to. This...

Srinidhi Chit Funds Private Limited Vs. Mercury Travels Limited and An ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Mrs. Mamata Lakshmanna, Member: 1. The petitioner filed his complaint before the Commission on 5.3.1993 against the opposite parties for deficiency of service and seeks directions to opposite parties to pay it Rs. 5,00,000/- towards damages, loss of future profits and costs. 2. The case is as follows : The complainant wanted to organise a business promotion trip to Kathmandu in May/June, 1992 for 40 chit subscribers. It approached the opposite party No. 1 who assured that tickets for 40 persons by Royal Nepal Airlines from Delhi to Kathmandu on 28.5.1992 and return from Kathmandu to Delhi on 31.5.1992 would be arranged. On the basis of that assurance the complainant made its own arrangement for all the 40 subscribers to travel by Dakshin Express from Hyderabad to Hazrat Nizamuddin Railway Station (New Delhi) on 26.5.1992 and return journey from Hazrat Nizamuddin Railway Station to Hyderabad on 31.5.1992. However, later opposite party informed that it was not possible to get confirmed A...

Apsrtc, Mushirabad, Hyd. and Another Vs. M. Ramulu and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(1)ALD138; 1999(6)ALT578

ORDER1. This writ petition is filed by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, represented by it's Managing Director, Hyderabad, for a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-II, Hyderabad, in Miscellaneous Petition No.57 of 1997, dated 18-9-1998, wherein the Labour Court directed for the payment of wages of Rs. 19,123/-to the first respondent for the period from 23-2-1995 to 8-11-1995 when the first respondent was kept under put-off duty.2. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition can be briefly summarised as follows:The first respondent herein who is the petitioner before the Labour Court II was a casual driver on daily wages from 9-3-1992. While driving the vehicle bearing Regd. No.AP9Z-7643 on 23-2-1995 he caused an accident while negotiating a curve shaped road collided with a scooterbearing No.AEY-8821 resulting the death of the scooterist and a pillion rider sustaine...

Commissioner, Ongole Municipality, Ongole Vs. Kunchala Sreenu and Anot ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(1)ALD97; 2000(1)ALT161; [2000(85)FLR836]

ORDER1. In all these matters, the Commissioner, Ongole Municipality is the petitioner. The petitioner is aggrieved by the Award passed by the 2nd respondent dated 3-6-1999 in 11 ID cases filed by the former workmen of the Municipality claiming the relief of reinstatement with back wages. The facts offered and the evidence led all the 11 IDs., were the same. Therefore, the same documents were marked in each ID and the same witnesses were examined. However, 11 different awards on the same day i.e., 3-6-1999 were passed directing the petitioner to reinstate the workmen with 50% back wages and attendant benefits. As mentioned at the out set, the writ petitions are filed for a writ of certiorari to quash the award passed by the 2nd respondent. When the matters were listed for admission before me, Sri D. Srinivas, representing Mr. B. Venkateswara Rao, submitted that caveat petitions are filed by the workmen and hence they may be heard. I have heard the learned Counsel for the Employer/Commis...

Sha Shivaji Mansey Vs. Vallabha Vyas

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(2)ALD505; 2000(2)ALT306

ORDER1. The CRP is filed against the orders of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada in RCA No.41 of 1983 confirming the order of the learned Principal District Munsif-cum-Rent Controller, Vijayawada in RC No.99 of 1982 dated 8-4-1983. 2. Petitioner is the tenant. The demised premises was let out to the petitioner in the year 1954 on initial monthly rent of Rs.200/- which was being increased from time to time. At the time of filing the application in 1982, the rent was being paid at Rs.300/- per month. White so, the landlord instituted a claim for eviction by filing a petition before the learned Rent Controller, Vijayawada in RC No.99 of 1982 on the ground that the tenant had committed wilful default in payment of rent for the months of March and April, 1982.3. It was the case of the landlord that he has specifically appointed a clerk to collect the rent and the clerk approached the tenant for collecting the rent for the month of March, 1982 which was not paid on the grou...

Suriti Ramulu Vs. Superintendent of Police, Mahaboobnagar and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(6)ALD681; 2000(1)ALT(Cri)393

ORDER1. The above writ petition was filed by the petitioner to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in opening a rowdy-sheet against the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to delete the petitioner's name in the rowdy-sheet and pass such further orders.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was resident of Marikal village of Dhanwada Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District, and he was an agriculturist. In addition to that doing some civil contracts in Goa since a long time and he was also the Block Congress President of Devarkadra which falls in Amarchinta Assembly Constituency. He further submitted that one Satyanarayana Goud of Marikal, belonging to Telugu Desam Party, resides in their village, that there is a lane in between the house of said Satyanarayana Goud and S. Veeranna being used as passage for about 20 families living behind the houses ...