Andhra Pradesh Court February 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.
Sandari Vani Vs. Sandari Ravindranath
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD215; 1999(2)ALT179
ORDER1. By the present petition, the wife is seeking for transfer of OP No.26 of 1997 on the file of the Subordinate Judge at Karimnagar, to the file of the Family Court, Secunderabad, where her application in OP No.282 of 1997 is pending.2. The petitioner and the respondent are wife and husband and got two children out of the wedlock. The wife and husband are living separately due to differences since 1996. The husband filed OP No.26 of 1997 on the file of the Subordinate Judge at Karimnagar seeking divorce on the ground of mental cruelty and infidelity. The wife filed OP No.282 of 1997 before the Family Court, Secunderabad for restitution of conjugal rights. She also filed a private complaint in CC No.191 of 1998 under Sections 492-A, 323, 500 IPC and also under Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act and the same is pending on the file of the Family Court, Hyderabad. By the present application, the petitioner is seeking transfer of OP No.26 of 1997 on the file of the Subordinate J...
General Manager, Bhel Research and Development, Vikasnagar, Hyd. and O ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD311; 1999(2)ALT363; (1999)IILLJ549AP
ORDERM.S. Liberhan, CJ 1. The skeletal facts in this appeal as emerged are not in dispute. A letter of resignation dated 1-12-1986 was received by the appellants-management on 2-12-1986 from the respondent-employee to the effect that since the employee is not enjoying the management's confidence, she has decided to resign from the organisation. The employee offered her resignation to be processed as per Rules. It was further brought to the notice of the management that she had got 75 days earned leave and 70 days half pay leave to her credit; thus after adjusting 30 days earned leave towards the notice period, she may be granted leave for the balance period of earned leave and half pay leave and she may be relieved on the day her leave expires. The management vide letter dated 15-12-1986 intimated that the competent authority has accepted her resignation and after adjusting the leave of 31 days towards the notice period andgranting 36 days from 28-11-1986 to 2-1-1987 as the earned leav...
Kamarapu Veera Laxmi and Others Vs. Vemula Krishna Murthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD400; 1999(2)ALT276
1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30-3-1994 passed by the II Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, in AS No.9 of 1991 confirming the Judgment and decree passed by the Principal District Munsif, Karimnagar, in OS No.980 of 1983 dated 3-5-1991.2. The appellants herein are the defendants and the respondent herein is theplaintiff ill the said OS No.980 of 1983. For the sake of convenience, they are referred as such hereafter.3. The facts, in brief, resulting in filing of this appeal are as under : (i) The first appellant-defendant is the landlord of the mulgi bearing No.2-6-3 situated at Office Road, Karimnagar. The respondent-plaintiff is the tenant for the said premises for the last 21 years. He is running a cloth shop under the name and style 'Sri Satyanarayana Vastralayam' in that mulgi. The first defendant refused to receive the rents from 1-8-1983. Therefore, the plaintiff sent the rent due for three months through money order on 17-11-1983, but the same w...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Ramachandrapuram, Hyderabad Vs. Commerc ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)ALD722A; 1999(4)ALT85
ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. In these writ petitions, common question of law arises and hence they are disposed of by this common order.2. These writ petitions are filed seeking a direction to the respondents not to demand the payment of disputed tax for the year 1998-99 APGST (Pro.,) (April & May, '98); and for the year 1997-98 APGST (Prov.,) respectively till the disposal of the appeals by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad. It is the contention of the petitioner (hat the stay granted by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Legal), Hyderabad (fourth respondent) under Section 19 (2-B) of the APGST Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act') during Ihe pendency of the first appeals filed before the third respondent must be deemed to continue and be operative even during the pendency of the second appeal in the Tribunal. The same contention was rejected by a Division Bench of this Court (of which one of us was a member) in WP No.34611 of 1998 dated 24-12-1998. In that judgment, i...
Kottur Viswandham and Others Vs. Kottur Rajeswar
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD301; 1999(2)ALT204
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel on both sides.2. The short question, which arises for decision in this CRP, is whether (he award dated 20-2-1993 passed by the arbitrators is inadmissible in evidence for non-payment of requisite stamp duty and for want of registration. The facts leading to the Revision Petition may be briefly stated :The petitioners herein and the respondent are brothers. There was a partition of (heir family properties in the year 1985 during the life-time of their father Gangaiah. In the said division the father was allotted one house property situated in Devi Road, Nizambad. The father subsequently died in June, 1991. After the death of the father, the respondent herein came to be in sole occupation and possession of the house property which was allotted to the father in the earlier partition. After the death of the father, disputes arose between the brothers regarding the partition of their properties. The disputes were referred by (hem to arbitrators on 16-7-1992...
C. Ramachandra Naidu Vs. M. Rajamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD314; 1999(1)ALT815
ORDER1. The petitioner herein was the plaintiff. He had instituted the suit against the defendants i.e., the respondents herein, in OS No.301 of 1989 which is pending on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi. The said suit was filed for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 24-4-1989 and also to put the plaintiff in possession of the suit schedule property.2. On completion of formalities, the evidence commenced. The plaintiff produced the document i.e., agreement of sale, which was exhibited in the evidence. After few days, the plaintiff filed an application i.e., IA No.1332 of 1997 under Section 38 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 with a prayer to send an agreement of sale to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupathi for levying and collecting stamp duty as it was inadequately stamped. The defendants-respondents herein filed their counter and resisted IA No.1332 of 1997. The learned Judge heard the matter on merits and refused to send the agreement of sale...
Goriparthi Ranga Rao Vs. State of A.P. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD396; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)525; 1999(1)ALT(Cri)482
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counselfor the Petitioner.2. A criminal case is pending before the trial Court against the respondents 2 to 7 herein for the offences under Sections 326 and 341 IPC. The petitioner is PW I. PW1 and the accused entered into a compromise and sought permission of the Court below for compounding of the offences. Under the agreement the accused had to pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- to the petitioner-complainant. The learned Magistrate did not allow the application and dismissed it on the ground that the accused had been charged underSection 326 1PC which was non-compoundable.3. In my view, there is nothing wrong in the order and the Magistrate had no option but to reject the application for compounding of offence which is expressly non-compoundable in terms of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner relies on a judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Motet. Rafi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1998 (1) ALD 724. The judgment to which ...
D. Aarati Deendayal Vs. Convenor, Eamcet-examination, Hyd. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD217; 1999(2)ALT244
1. The petitioner was a candidate for the qualifying examination to M.B.B.S. She appeared in EAMCET-1998 examination on 14th May, 1998. Time schedule to the examination was from 2.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. She submits that she was given the paper at 2.20 p.m., 10 minutes time was given for reading the instructionsand she started answering the questions at 2.30 p.m. She found repetition of question No.51 and question No.75 at about 2.55 p.m. She informed the Invigilator and the Invigilator told her to continue answering the other questions, in the meantime, according to the petitioner, for next 40 minutes three Inviligators repeatedly one after the other came to her and asked about her problem. Thereafter it was realised that there was a mixing of question sheets of different codes, code-B and D were mixed disproportionately in all the subjects when only questions of code B should have been in the question papers. This was the mistake committed by the Invigilators and first respondent. There...
P. Rama Appa Rao Vs. Visakhapatnam Steel Project Employees Consumers C ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD236; 1999(2)ALT290
ORDER1. Assailing the validity of the resolution adopted by the Managing Committee of the first respondent at its meeting held on 23-11-1998, removing the petitioner as Secretary, this Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner.2. The principal contention raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is that under Section 34-A of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short, the Act) No-Confidence Motion can be moved against the President or the Vice-President of the Committee, but not the Secretary of the Society, The petitioner being an elected Secretary and the Statute do not provide for removal of the Secretary by way of No-Confidence Motion, the Resolution adopted by the Managing Committee, is without jurisdiction and nullity in the eye of law.3. I have gone through Section 34-A of the Act and other relevant provisions for disposal of the writ petition. It is true that Section 34-A of the Act - introduced by Act 21 of 1985 which came into force with effect fr...
District Collector, Hyderabad and Others Vs. Ayesha Sultana
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD244; 1999(2)ALT378
ORDERM.S. Liberhan, C.J. 1. The writpetitioner-respondent has offered her building on rent to the State at Rs. 16,000/- per month and in pursuance thereof an agreement has been entered into between the State and the owner of the building by which the owner agreed to accept the rent as fixed by the competent authority. Thus the State has taken over possession of the building in the year 1994. The competent authority, the Executive Engineer PWD (R&B;), South Department, Hyderabad, has fixed reasonable rent for the said building at Rs.15,000/- per month. Instead of paying the rent to the writ petitioner at that rate, the Collector who is the sanctioning authority for inter-departmental purposes, has assumed jurisdiction over the matter and arbitrarily refixed the rent at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per month wide impugnedproceedings dated 13-3-1997. The learned single Judge rightly quashed the said proceedings as illegal.2. The Collector is merely a sanctioning authority who has no role to pla...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »