Andhra Pradesh Court April 1999 Judgments

Kanadapudi Bharathy, Gudivada and Another Vs. Authority Under Section ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(3)ALD420; 1999(3)ALT428

ORDER1. The short question that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether power of attorney holder of a party is entitled to appear as a witness on behalf of the said party ?2. The facts leading for filing of this writ petition are as follows :The writ petitioners are the owners of a Hotel at Gudivada in Krishna District. The second respondent herein was the Manager of the said Hotel. As a result of some mis-givings, the second respondent was kept away from Hotel business from the year 1992 onwards. The second respondent raised a dispute before the Authority under Section 50 of A.P. Shops and EstablishmentsAct-cum-Labour Officer (first respondent herein) in A.P.F.C. No.4 of 1996. The second respondent also filed a civil suit in OSNo.209 of 1996 in the Court of the District Munsif, Gudivada, claiming a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards bonus arrears. The petitioners filed a counter in A.P.F.C.No.4 of 1996 contending that since the second respondent was drawing a salary of...

Executive Officer, Group Temples, Guntur Vs. Dasaratha Rama Rao and Ot ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(4)ALD164; 1999(3)ALT466

ORDERA.S. Bhate, J 1. Facts in Writ Appeal No.461 of 1999 are stated for purpose of understanding the dispute that arises. This appeal arises out of decision rendered in WP No.14680 of 1996. The said writ petition was as follows :The founder Sri Ram Mohana Rao had purchased certain vacant land and created charitable endowment in the name of 'Sri Tadavarthy Rama Mohan Rao Choultry'. The writ petitioner is a hereditary trustee of the said Trust. The Trust was originally created long back. The Endowment Department passed order on 4-7-1996 appointing an Executive Officer to manage the Trust in question under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (hereafter referred to as the 'Act'). The petitioner challenged the appointment of the said Executive Officer. The order passed by the Endowment Department directed the petitioner to handover complete charge of the records, accounts, movable and immovable property to the Executive ...

P. Ruth Sowsheela and Others Vs. District Educational Officer, Kurnool ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(5)ALD128; 1999(4)ALT40

ORDER1. This writ petition brings to light the helplessness of the educated unemployed and their exploitation by the unscrupulous Managements of Private Minority Educational Institutions in the selection for Unaided Teacher posts.2. The petitioners herein are the qualified Teachers. The second (sic. third) respondent herein is the Manager of a Group of Minority Educational Institutions run in different names at Nandyal and also at Kurnool. The Teachers appointed in those Schools are liable to be transferred from one School to another School under his Management. The fourth respondent herein is the Convenor of S.P.G. Schools, Nandyal Diocese and the fifth respondent herein is the Correspondent of S.P.G. Model Elementary School, Nandyal. The petitioners who were working in Compassion School in Kurnool were transferred to S.P.G. Model Elementary School through the proceedings of the third respondent dated 19-4-1997. Even before their transfer to that School, the third respondent issued an...

M.C. Junior College (H.S.) Vs. District Educational Officer and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(5)ALT96

ORDERRamesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. The petitioner herein is a Junior College represented by its Secretary and Correspondent. It is stated in the affidavit that there are total 19 teaching posts and 7 non-teaching posts which are admitted to grant-in-aid by the competent authority and that the said posts are manned by different individuals in the management. It is further averred by the petitioner that four vacancies i.e., one post each of Physical Educatior Teacher, Craft Teacher, Drawing Teacher and Waterman fell vacant on different dates and that all these posts were admitted to grant-in-aid. It is further averred by the petitioner that the management requested the first respondent to accord permission to fill up the above four vacancies. The first respondent by proceedings in Rc.No. 58/A9/97 dated 30-7-1998 accorded the permission to fill up the above four vacancies as per the roster points. The vacancy of Physical Education Teacher is reserved for S.C. woman; the vacancy of Craft Teach...

Amei Power Limited Vs. Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financia ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(3)ALD447; 1999(3)ALT437; [1999]97CompCas648(AP)

1. Assailing the order passed by the second respondent and confirmed by the first respondent in Appeal No.204/1997, dated 17-4-1998, by this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a declaration that the order passed by the B.I.F.R. and confirmed by the appellate authority is illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 with a further request to direct the 2nd respondent to reconsider the matter of rehabilitation of the petitioner-company.2. The facts giving rise to this writ petition, in brief, are that at the reference made by the petitioner-company to the second respondent, the reference was registered as Case No.89/1996 and after consideration, the 2nd respondent held that the petitioner-company was sick industrial company within the meaning of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision) Act, 1985 (for short, 'SICA'). The 2nd respondent also found that it was not possible for ...

Kolluri Suseelamma and Others Vs. Yerramilli Nageswara Rao

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(3)ALD604; 1999(3)ALT41

1. The substantial question of law in this Second Appeal is whether Rule 12 or Rule 18 of Order XX of the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable for ascertainment of profits, both past and future, in a suit for partition and separate possession of properties devolved by gift jointly made to the donees?2. OS No.38 of 1970 was filed by the plaintiff, namely, Yerramilli Nageswara Rao against 25 defendants for partition and separate possession of his share in plaint A and B schedule properties and also for rendition of accounts by the 1st defendant for his management of the said properties. Defendants 2 to 18 are the other sharers entitled to all the properties. The suit schedule properties were gifted jointly to the parties.3. The preliminary decree was passed on 30-7-1971. Defendant No.1 died on 18-1-1979. Defendant No.7 pre-deceascd him. As per the preliminary decree, plaint A schedule properties were to be divided into 6 equal shares and one such share was to be allotted to the plaintif...

Badavath Lachu Vs. State of A.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD(Cri)896; 1999(3)ALT704; 1999(2)ALT(Cri)217; 1999CriLJ5032

Vaman Rao, J.1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C. No. 290 of 1995 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Nalgonda. He has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to simple imprisonment for 15 days. This conviction is challenged in this appeal.2. The brief facts of the case as brought out in the prosecution evidence may be stated as follows:The accused is a resident of Thettekunta Thanda. The deceased was the resident of Ravikunta Thanda. P.W. 1, Badavath Lachi Ram, is the father-in-law of the deceased and he is also a resident of Thettekunta Thanda. The deceased along with his family were residing in Ravikunta Thanda on the date of the incident. P.W. 1 and the deceased proceeded to Ravipahad Thanda along with a bull (calf) to have it sold at Ravipahad Thanda on the date of incident. The deceased was proceeding in front of P.W. 1 holding the rope ...

A.P. Forest Development Corporation Limited and Another Vs. B.S. Sunda ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. These two appeals arose out of the order of the Khammam District Forum in O.P. No. 114/1994 dated 28.12.1994. F.A. No. 72/1995 was preferred by the opposite parties in that O.P. and F.A. No. 681/1995 was preferred by the complainant. 2. The dispute raised by the complainant relates to purchase of beedi leaves by it from the Andhra Pradesh Forest Development Corporation Limited. There is no doubt that the complainant at the relevant time was the manufacturer of B.S. Jadi Beedies and the purchase of beedi leaves was made by it for the manufacture of beedies. This is clearly for a commercial purpose. The District Forum failed to notice this and without adverting to this aspect of the matter allowed the complaint awarding compensation of Rs. 90,000/- towards deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties because of delay of two months in delivering the beedi leaves rejecting the defence of the opposite parties that there was no delay on their part ...

Sk. Mahaboob Jan and Others Vs. State

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(3)ALD391; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)674; 1999(3)ALT620

ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, Petitioner No. 1 to 5 have been convicted under Section 498-A iPC and they have filed an appeal against the conviction which is pending before the Sessions Judge. Petitioner No.6 was also accused of the same offence in the same case but was not available when the others were tried therefore he is being tried now separately. Petitioner No.l is the wife of petitioner No.6 on whose motion the Police had registered a case under Section 498-A IPC. This petition has been filed seeking quashing of the sentence passed on petitioners 2 to 5 and the prosecution against petitioner No.6.2. There is no question of quashing the conviction and sentence of petitioners 2 to 5 as the accused-petitioners have the remedy of appeal which they have already taken up and the appeal is pending. Since an appeal is pending before the competent Court this Court will not consider quashing of the conviction and sentence against petitioners 2 to 5 in proceedings...

Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence, Pune and Another Vs. NitIn Gumbhe ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(3)ALD306; 1999(3)ALT361

ORDERA.S. Bhate, J.1. The decision in WP No.13099 of [992, disposed of by learned single Judge of this Court on 15-2-1993, is subject of challenge in this appeal.2. The computation of the excess vacant land under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was the subject of writ petition. The learned single Judge by the impugned judgment held that notification under Section 10(3) of the Act dated 10-9-1992issued by the second respondent declaring 4180.12 square metres as the excess vacant land, deserved to be quashed.3. In the first place we have not been able to understand as to why the writ petition was entertained when there was adequate alternative statutory remedy provided by Section 33 of the Act. Section 33 is as follows :'(1) A person aggrieved by an order made by the competent authority under this Act not being an order under Section 11 or an order under sub-section(1) of Section 30, may within thirty days of the ...