Andhra Pradesh Court June 1999 Judgments

Yadiki Nadipi Yerikala Reddy @ Boreddi and Others Vs. State of A.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(4)ALD276; 1999(2)ALT(Cri)99; 1999CriLJ4821

ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. In these three petitions which are filed under Section 482 of Cr.PC, petitioners have sought a direction to the learned Sessions Judge, Cuddapah to issue fresh warrants of commitment to the Superintendent, Central Prison, Cuddapab, indicating that the period of detention undergone by them prior to their conviction and sentence in SC No.225 of 1994 dated 24-10-1996 by the Sessions Judge, Cuddapah be given set-off even against the sentence of life imprisonment, imposed on them through the said judgment.2. According to the learned senior Counsel Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, appearing on behalf of these petitioners, these petitioners were found guilty of committing various including the offences under Section 302 IPC and Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and weresentenced to suffer imprisonment for life by the Sessions Judge, Cuddapah through judgment dated 24-10-1996 in SC No.225 of 1994. Learned senior Counsel stated that though these petitioners filed Criminal...

Nimmagadda Sambasiva Rao Vs. State of A.P., Land Reforms, Guntur

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(4)ALD321; 1999(4)ALT353

ORDER1. This is a revision filed under Section 21 of Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short 'the Act').2. The petitioner and his major son filed separate declarations under the provisions of the Act inrespect of the lands held by them. After due enquiry by order dated 5-11-1979 the Land Reforms Tribunal held that both of them are non-surplus holders. On appeals filed by the State the matter was remanded to the primary Tribunal on 6-1-1984 to consider the question whether the lands covered by certain agreements of sale were liable to be included in the holdings of the declarants or not. Questioning the said order of remand, the petitioner herein filed CRP No.912 of 1985. By order dated 4-8-1987 the said CRP was allowed in part holding that the petitioner's major son was entitled to hold one standard holding of land separately, it was, however, held that the lands covered by agreements of sale have to be included in the holdings of the declara...

Sweety Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad and o ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(4)ALD3; 1999(4)ALT115

ORDER1. The petitioner is a company engaged in the business of construction of commercial and residential complexes. One Sri Vishnuvardhan obtained building permission for construction of stilt plus three floors of residential building, vide Permit No.410/93, dated 19-5-1993 on his plot in Road No.l, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad admeasuring 654 Sq. Yards. Under an agreement of sale the petitioner purchased the said property and also acquired all the rights. It is alleged that the vendor of the petitioner commenced the construction within one year as per the building bye-laws and by the time the petitioner purchased theproperty, the stilt plus 3 floors were already completed. As per the Zoning Regulations, Ihe plot number of the petitioner, Road No.l, Banjara Hills fell in residential area. Therefore, Sri Vishnuvardhan had made a representation dated 28-8-1997 seeking conversion of land use from residential to commercial. The Government by letter No.19451/11/97-1, M.A., dated 8-9-1998 calle...

A. Suryanarayana Rao Vs. C. Radhakrishnaiah

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(4)ALT684

ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. Heard Sri J. Ugranarasimha, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.S. Narayana, the learned Counsel for the respondent.2. The instant Civil Revision Petition by the tenant is directed against an order passed by the learned Appellate Authority in reversing the order passed by the learned Rent Controller. The Appellate Authority ordered eviction of the petitioner herein from the petition schedule premises on the ground that he is using the petition schedule premises 'for other purposes and not for the purpose for which it was let out, that is to say, for doing business'.3. The respondent herein filed R.C.C. No. 27 of 1991 on the file of the learned Rent Controller-cum-Principal District Munsif, Tirupathi under Section 10(1), (2)(i), (2)(iii), (2)(vi), 3(a)(i)(b) and under Section 26 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act'). In the said petition, the respondent herein alleged that the petition ...

T.R. Vinod Singh Vs. A.P. State Electricity Board, Hyderabad and Other ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(4)ALD58; 1999(4)ALT82

ORDER1. The petitioner joined the service of the respondent-Board as Trainee Assistant Engineer and subsequently he was appointed as Assistant Engineer at Bolaram with effect from 11-8-1991. When he was serving the Board, he was arrested by the Police on 21-12-1996 in Crime No.404 of 1996 on the file of the XXII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The petitioner was released on bail on 26-12-1996. According to the petitioner, immediately after his release on bail, he approached the respondents to resume the duty but he was not permitted to resume duty; the petitioner made several representations including the latest representation dated 17-3-1997 to the 3rd respondent to permit him to resume duty; the 3rd respondent by his letter dated 27-5-1997 directed the petitioner to produce certified copy of the bail order granted in favour of the petitioner; after obtaining the certified copy of the bail order, the petitioner submitted the same to the 3rd respondent on 19-9-1997; even thereafter...

Putumbaka Purnachandra Rao and anr. Vs. State Bank of India, Shamsheer ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(4)ALT374

ORDERS.R. Nayak, J.1. This is a Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India directed against the orders of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Andhra and Karnataka), Bangalore in O.A. No. 663 of 1996 dated 31-12-1997. The respondent/Bank has filed O.A. No. 663/96 for recovery of certain sum of money from the petitioners who are defendants in the O.A. It appears that after filing of all the documents, the Bank sought to produce certain additional documents. At this stage, the petitioners/defendants filed LA. No. l of 1997 under Rule 18 of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Proceedings (sic. Procedure)) Rules, 1993 (for short 'the Rules') praying the Tribunal to permit the defendants to file their additional counter in the case. That application was dismissed by the Tribunal by the impugned order. The docket order reads thus:'Objections to I.A. 1 filed heard. Reply statement is already filed. No further scope to file any additional reply which is not even filed with I....

Vijay Packaging Systems Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(120)ELT79(AP)

ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. The order dated 6-11-1998 and 10-2-1999 of the CEGAT, South Zonal Bench at Chennai are being assailed in this writ petition. Pending the appeal, the Tribunal directed the deposit of a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- towards the disputed duty within three months and the pre-condition of deposit of tax and penalty has been waived subject to the fulfilment of the said condition. The petition for re-consideration of the said order made on the ground of financial inability and the sickness of the company has been rejected by the Tribunal by its order dated 10-2-1999. Hence the present writ petition.2. As the appeal has been rejected during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has sought for amendment of the writ petition by filing W.P.M.P. No. 15682 of 1999 for quashing the order of CEGAT dated 12-5-1999. That application has been allowed by us today.3. Having regard to the magnitude of duty and penalty involved, the order passed by the Tribunal is appare...

V. Mehar Shravan Kumar Vs. Regional Passport Officer

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. The complainant Mr. V. Mehar Shravan Kumar is aggrieved by the alleged deficiency in service on the part of the Passport Officer in issuing to him passport belatedly because of which he could not joint the medical course for which he got admission in Vinnitsa Medical University, Ukraine. The complainant states tha the received admission letter dated 27.7.1998 from the Ukrainian Ministry of Public Health stating that he had been admitted in Vinnitsa Medical University for a Bachelor of Medicine (M.B.B.S.) course on the basis of self finance and requiring him to furnish his passport number and that he applied for a passport to the opposite party on 1.8.1998 paying the prescribed fee of Rs. 300/-by way of bank draft. The opposite party issued to him a passport bearing No. A6625884 dated 12.11.1998 on 26.11.1998. He was to join the medical course in the University in Ukraine by 20.9.1998 when the classes were to start. The complainant submits that there was i...

Bammidi Jagannayakulu and Others Vs. District Collector, Srikakulam an ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(3)ALD15; 1999(3)ALT733

ORDER1. The lands admittedly owned by Shri Shyama Sundara Swamy Temple, Tekkali are sought to be acquired by the State in terms of the provisions of the LandAcquisition Act. Shri Shyama Sundara Swamy Temple has not been made a party in this writ petition. The acquisition is sought to be challenged on one ground only. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits a proposition of law which has to be considered. He submits that, land under tenancy which is subject to the provisions of Tenancy Act can in no circumstances be acquired by the State Government. He submits that since the tenancy created under Tenancy Act is a tenancy in perpetuity, therefore acquisition of the land would be defeating such provisions. He submits that the respondent No.3 had in fact issued notice under Section 80(1 Kb) of the A.R Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act No.30 of 1987), but surprisingly the State Government issued a notification under Section 4(i) of the Land Ac...

N.C. Padmanabhan Vs. Board of Directors and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(3)ALD715; 1999(4)ALT25

ORDER1. The petitioner while serving as Branch Manager at Hyderabad was charged with misconduct under the service regulations. The charge memo issued to the petitioner on 3-7-1985 mentions three charges (i), (ii) and (iii). The Inquiring Authority appointed by the Managing Director conducted the departmental enquiry and submitted his report recording the finding that the charges (i) and (ii) are not proved and that only charge No.(iii) is proved. The Chief General Manager, after consideration of the findings recorded by the Inquiring authority and taking into account all the attending facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence placed before him concluded that the petitioner is guilty of the (iii) charge and the petitioner deserves deterrent action. However, taking lenient view of the matter and with a view to afford the delinquent-petitioner an opportunity for improving, the Chief General Manager imposed the penalty of reduction to lower stage in the time scale applicable to ...