Andhra Pradesh Court March 2000 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.
K. Bhoom Reddy Vs. Sulochana Bai and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALD314; 2000(3)ALT178; II(2000)DMC455
1. All these appeals arise out of similar and common orders dated 10-4-1995 in different execution applications filed by the appellants herein in EP No. 19 of 1989 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Bodhan in OS No.170 of 1984. All the appellants are the claim petitioners before the Subordinate Judge, Bodhan in different execution applications in the same EP No. 19 of 1989 and the respondents are one and the same, and therefore, all these appeals are disposed of by a common order.2. The 1st respondent Smt. Sulochana Bai is the wife of the 2nd respondentSri Manithi Rao. The 1st respondent filed OP No. 1620 of 1981 against the 2nd respondent on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nizamabad stating that she married the defendant in 1969 and the defendant deserted her and OP No.49 of 1969 filed by her husband for divorce was dismissed, which was reversed by the District Court, Nizamabad in CMA No.6 of 1974, and against which, she filed an appeal before the High Court and the High Court a...
Mc. Dowell and Co., Ltd., Visakhapatnam Vs. District Registrar, Visakh ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALD199; 2000(2)ALT743
ORDERS. Ananda Reddy, J.1. This referred case is at the instance of the petitioner-company referred by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The following question is referred for the opinion of this Court:'Whether the document under consideration styled as letter of subrogation and special Power of Attorney is a General Power of Attorney attracting a stamp duty of Rs.20/- or whether it is in addition an assignment of the benefit of a contract to be treated as Conveyance under Article 20 of Schedule I-A of Indian Stamp Act.'2. The facts of the case are as follows:The petitioner-company approached the District Registrar, Visakhapatnam with a draft deed purporting to be a letter of subrogation and special power of attorney for opinion under Section 31 of the Act. The District Registrar opined that the document was an assignment of the benefit of a contract to be treated as conveyance under Article 20...
Vandrasi Ramakrishna Vs. Nagoti Saroja
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)ALD737; 2000(2)ALT434
1. The unsuccessful plaintiff, who lost in both the Courts below, has come up in second appeal. He laid the suit for declaration that he was the adopted son of one late Vandarasi Srinivasa Rao, The defendants 1 to 5 in the suit are the daughters and the 6th defendant is a natural son of the said Srinivasa Rao. Srinivasa Rao and plaintiffs natural father Satyanarayana (PW2) are brothers. Though the suit was filed for a bare declaration without seeking any consequential relief, the main reason for filing the suit appears to be to secure renewal of certain contracts which Srinivasa Rao had wiih the Railway. Yet curiously the railway was not impleaded as a party to the suit nor was any relief claimed against the Railway. According to the plaintiff the alleged adoption took place at Chinaganjam on 31-3-1972. By that date Srinivasa Rao had only five daughters and the sixth defendant was subsequently born. Srinivasa Rao died on 14-3-1981. He was a Railway Contractor running stalls on the Rail...
A.K. Reddy Vs. Depot Manager, Apsrtc, Nellore and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)ALD818; 2000(2)ALT214
ORDER1. The petitioner, who is currently serving as driver in theestablishment of the APSRTC being aggrieved by the Officer Order No.El/ 367(2)/98-NLR-I, dated 15-4-1999 of the Depot Manager, Nellore-I-the first respondent herein directing recovery of a sum of Rs.8,434-30 ps. from the salary of the petitioner on the ground that family planning incentive increment was wrongly paid to the petitioner for the period from 23-5-1991 to 31-5-1998, has filed this writ petition assailing the validity of the same.2. The circumstances that led to filing of the writ petition may be stated briefly as under: The petitioner while serving as Driver submitted a representation stating that his wife underwent tubectomy operation on 14-9-1990 after giving birth to two children and requested the management to grant family planning incentive increment as per the scheme framed by the management. Acting on the representation of the petitioner, he was sanctioned one incentive increment with effect from 1-10-19...
P. Srinivas Vs. Industrial Tribunal-cum-labour-court, Warangal and Oth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALD85; 2000(2)ALT416; [2000(86)FLR107]
ORDER1. The petitioner while serving as conductor in the establishment of the APSRTC was subjected to disciplinary proceedings on the alleged misconduct committed by him. Those disciplinary proceedings resulted in removal of the petitioner as a disciplinary measure by Office Order dated 8-7-1978. The petitioner workman instituted ID No.77 of 1986 in the Labour Court, Warangal. The Labour Court passed an award on 2-2-1987 in favour of the petitioner-workman directing reinstatement of the petitioner into service with continuity of service and full back wages. The validity of the award wasassailed before this Court both before the learned single Judge and Division Bench and ultimately the management failed in its attempt and the award passed by the Labour Court, Warangal dated 2-2-1987 has become final. However, while proceedings were pending before this Court, it appears that the petitioner was reinstated into service on 1-12-1987.2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ pe...
G. Seshamma Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALD54; 2000(2)ALT749
1. These two writ petitions and the contempt case are filed by Smt. G. Seshamma, an Advocate practicing at Kovvur Court of Nellore District since 1978.2. She filed WP No.22717 of 1999 stating that on the request of the District Collector, Nellore, the District Judge, Nellore, by his proceedings issued in the month of November, 1999 requested the senior civil Judge, Kovvur to submit a panel containing three names of practicing advocates with their Bio-Data for being sent to the government for appointment Assistant Government Pleader for Senior Civil Judge's Court and Junior Civil Judge's Court at Kovvur duly considering the names of OC/ ST/BC and Women Advocates, having seven years standing at the Bar. A copy of the said proceedings was also communicated to all the Advocates of Kovvur Bar Association for furnishing information besides affixing a copy of the said proceedings on the Notice Board of the Senior Civil Judge's Court Kovvur. Pursuant to the same the petitioner also furnished h...
Sathrevada Valliamma Vs. S. Sabhapathi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)ALT621
ORDERG. Bikshapathy, J.1. The second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dt. 22-7-1999 of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Puttur in A.S. No. 7 of 1992 confirming the judgment and decree dt. 30-3-1992 of the Principal District Munsif, Puttur in O.S. No. 219 of 1984.2. Appellant is the plaintiff. He filed the suit O.S. No. 219 of 1984 for permanent injunction. The defendants heavily resisted the suit. After considering the respective pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed the following issues.(1) Whether the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule properties?(2) Whether the plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule properties as on the date of the suit?(3) Whether the plaintiff perfected her title to the plaint schedule properties by adverse possession?(4) Whether plaintiff is entitled to the permanent injunction as prayed for?(5) To what relief?3. Before the trial Court three witnesses were examined for the plaintiff and documen...
Byneedi Venkateswara Reddy and ors. Vs. Pasupulati Bhushaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-2000
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD(Cri)793; 2000(1)ALT(Cri)560; 2000CriLJ4733
ORDERVaman Rao, J.1. This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of the order dt. 10-8-1999 of the learned I Addl. Munsiff Magistrate, Narasaraopet in Crl. M.P. No. 767 of 1999 in CC. No. 224 of 1998 under which the petitioners have been directed to be summoned under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. to face trial in respect of offence under Section 379 of IPC along with accused No. 1.2. It appears the complaint in that CC filed Crl. M.P. No. 293 of 1999 for production of vehicle in respect of which offence is said to have been committed. In that petition, accused No. 1 in that case filed his counter stating that a partnership firm of which accused No. 1 is the Managing Partner had financed the complainant for purchase of the vehicle in question on hire-purchase basis and that as disputes arose between the partners, partnership was dissolved and the vehicle in question was now in the custody of Byneedi Venkateswara Reddy, petitioner No. 1 herein. This plea was taken as a way of defe...
Sai Sanjeva Tobacco Company Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central Ex ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-14-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALD125; 2000(3)ALT432; 2001(136)ELT45(AP)
ORDER1. P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. The petitioner filed a declaration under Karvivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 and paid the tax of Rs.9,33,442/-. By the impugned order dated 11-10-1999, the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, who is the Competent Authority under the scheme, declined to extend the benefit under the scheme on the following reasoning:'Your are not entitled to avail the benefits of the Karvivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 in respect of tax arrears demanded vide show-cause notice C.No.VIII/10/18 of 1996 CT dated 11-4-1997 issued by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Guntur, since you have not paid the entire amount, i.e., Rs.13,22,879/- as payable under Section 88(f) of the Finance (No.2) Act, 1998.'2. By the date of filing the declaration, the tax arrears quantified to be payable by the petitioner as per the show-cause notice dated 11-4-1997 were Rs.26,45,757/-. By an order dated 15-12-1999, which was passed after the last date stipulated in the scheme, the same...
Recon Agrotech Ltd. Vs. Vijaya Sales Corpn.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-14-2000
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD(Cri)790; [2001]106CompCas507(AP)
Vaman Rao, J.1. Considering the circumstances of the case and the nature of the order I propose to pass, it will amount to subjecting the respondents to unavoidable burden if notice is ordered in this case.2. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeks quashing of the orders passed by the 5th Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, dated 10-2-2000, in Crl. M.P. No. 453 of 2000, in C.C. No. 490 of 1999, on his file.3. The petitioner herein is the complainant in C.C. No. 490 of 1999 and the respondents are the accused therein. The complainant seeks to prosecute the respondents herein for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. After the examination of PW-1, a petition was filed before the trial court for recalling that witness and receiving a document said to be a resolution of the board of directors dated 27-6-1997, so that this document could be marked through PW-1. This petition was opposed on the ground that it amounts to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »