Andhra Pradesh Court April 2001 Judgments

Chittoor Co-operative Town Bank Ltd. Vs. A. Devendra Reddy and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2001(4)ALT116

S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 5-1-2001 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Review W.P.M.P. No. 4024 of 2000 in W.P. No. 14596 of 1997 whereby and whereunder the learned Judge has allowed the review application.2. In short, the facts of the case are as follows:The review petitioner-1st respondent herein was appointed as a Clerk in the appellant-Bank on 02-02-1976 and respondents 2 to 6 were appointed much later to him. A departmental enquiry was initiated against the 1st respondent in the year 1989 as regards false identification of a person by name Bujji, as a result whereof, the said Bujji could withdraw a sum of Rs. 50,000/- from S.B.A/c.No. 1880 of one Sri P. Venkatarama Reddy with a mala fide motive, and a charge was levelled against him, which read:'1. You have furnished a false identification of the cheques by name Bujji who presented the cheques for withdrawal of Rs. 50,000/-from the S.B.A/c.No. 1880 of Sri P. Venkatarama Reddy, ...

Gadiyaram Lakshminarayana Murthy Vs. Gadiyaram Venkata Rathnam, Adopte ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2001(5)ALT123

V. Eswaraiah, J.1. The plaintiff filed this Second Appeal against the judgment and decree in A.S. No. 101/1987 dated 27-03-1995 on the file of the Additional District, Judge, Tirupathi confirming the judgment and decree in O.S.No. 695/1980 dated 15-06-1987 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tirupathi in dismissing the suit. For the sake of clarity, the parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in the original suit.2. The 1st defendant - Gadiyaram Venkata Ratnam is the father of the plaintiff, defendants 2 to 5 are the brothers of the plaintiff and all are sons of the 1st defendant. The 6th defendant Rayadurgam Sambiah is the decree holder of O.S.No. 646/1971. During the pendency of the suit, the 2nd defendant died and his legal representatives were brought on record as defendants 7 to 10. The 11th defendant namely, Smt. Parameswaramma is the sister of the 6th defendant. During the pendency of the First Appeal, the 6th defendant died and his legal representatives wer...

K. Venkata Reddy Vs. Cit and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: (2001)169CTR(AP)41; [2001]250ITR147(AP)

S. Ananda Reddy, J.This writ petition is filed praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus declaring that the Communication No. CIT.AP.II/KVSS/190 of 1998-99, dated 17-12-1999, issued by the first respondent is illegal, arbitrary and a conse uential declaration that the payment dated 27-3-1999, made by the petitioner is valid and to direct the respondents to issue to the petitioner a certificate as re uired under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998.2. The petitioner is an individual, who was in arrears of tax to the Income Tax Department for the assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95. While so, in the year 1998, the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, declared a scheme called the 'Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as 'the KVS Scheme' or 'the Scheme'), with an object of reducing litigation, collecting revenues by the government at an early date and for de-clogging the legal system by reducing the number of appeals, writ petitions, revisions, etc., pending as o...

State of Andhra Pradesh, Education Dept. and ors. Vs. N. Koteswara Rao ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2001(4)ALT1

S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. The question, which arises for consideration in these applications, although is of some importance, having regard to the order proposed to be passed by us, it may not be necessary for us to advert to all the contentions raised in the applications and finally adjudicate thereupon.2. Suffice it to point out that the State of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No. 3, Social Welfare (TW.Edn.II) Department, dated 10-1-2000, purported to be in exercise of power conferred upon it under Schedule-Y appended to the Constitution of India. In terms of the said G.O.Ms.No. 3, dated 10-1-2000, reservations have been made in favour of the local tribal candidates for filling up all the vacancies of School Teachers in the educational institutions within the Scheduled Areas. Original Applications have been filed before the learned Tribunal, being O.A.No. 2138 of 2000 and batch, and by reason of an order dated 19-9-2000, the said G.O.Ms.No. 3 dated 10-1-2000 was quashed. As against the said d...

Y. Rama Krishna Vs. Govt. of A.P., Finance and Planning (Fin. Wing. Op ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2001(4)ALT122

S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. This Writ Petition is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 18-9-1998 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No. 51057 of 1990 whereby and whereunder the original application filed by the petitioner herein was disposed of observing that no orders are necessary to be passed on the O.A.2. The petitioner herein was recruited as temporary U.D. Stenographer on 22-3-1978. The Public Service Commission (PSC) notified vacancies for recruitment to the category of U.D. Stenographers in the said year. Pursuant to the notification of the PSC, the petitioner applied for appointment to the category of U.D. Stenographers. He was selected for the said post and his name was recommended for verification of his antecedents, whereafter he was allotted to the Finance and Planning (Finance Wing) Department for the purpose of regular recruitment as U.D. Stenographer. The authorization for such recruitment was received and entertained by the Finance and Planning...

Dr. A. Sairam Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. A reading of the complaint discloses these facts. The complainant is a doctor running Paragaon Maternity and Surgical Hospital since 3 years. Originally he started Maternity Hospital at Premises No. 13-6-437/1, Karol Bagh, opposite Padmanabhanagar Colony, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad. He purchased equipment i.e., Cautery machine, Electro surgical unit and Paragaon Maternity and Surgical Hospital glow sign board, etc. He insured the same with the second opposite party under Policy No. 050304/11/0151/91 on 30.8.1991. The complainant shifted the said Maternity and Surgical Hospital from Premises No. 13-6-437/1, Karol Bagh to 9-4-84/4, Kakatiyanagar Colony, Hyderabad in January, 1992. While so in the early hours of 2.2.1992 on the eve of Jumme-ki-Raat festival there was procession and riot took place near the hospital as a result of which the mob rushed inside the hospital and some unsocial elements smashed totally the glowing sign board and took away Diatherm...

Azeem Tower Owners/Residents Welfare Association Vs. Azeem Constructio ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Dr. (Mrs.) Mamata Lakshmanna, Member: 1. The original complaint was filed by M/s. Azeem Towers Owners/Residents Welfare Association, registered under Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Areas) Public Societies Registration Act, 1350 Fasli with Registration No. 133 of 1990 accorded by the Registrar of Societies, Hyderabad, rep. by its Secretary against opposite parties. Opposite party No. 1 is the construction company, whereas opposite party No. 2 is the Managing Partner of the first opposite party. Opposite party No. 3 is a partner of opposite party No. 1 and 4th opposite party was impleaded on 8.8.1996 as per orders in I.A. No. 431/1996. It is stated in the complaint that opposite party No. 1 after getting sanction from M.C.H., entered into individual agreements with members of the complainant Association in 1981-82 for construction of 32 flats. There are two blocks in the Complex with twenty-eight 2-bed room and four 3-bed room flats with construction costs of Rs. 1,45,000/- and Rs. 1,75,000/-...

Vijaya Rubber Reclaim Company Vs. the Divisional Manager, the New Indi ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. The complainant is a small-scale industry and is recognized as such by the Industries Department. The complainant has taken the policy covering flood and cyclone risk for all items except 5 and 6 during the period from 8.1.1989 to 7.1.1990 on payment of required premium of Rs. 5,378/-. Similarly for the year 1990-91 the complainant has paid a sum of Rs. 5,378/- vide Cheque No. 210611 drawn on the Bank of Baroda, Vijayawada dated 3.1.1990 and requested to renew the policy for another year commencing from 7.1.1990 to 6.1.1991. The second opposite party though received did not issue any policy in spite of several requests. 2. Unfortunately the complainant suffered heavy damage due to cyclone that occurred on 9th and 10th May, 1990. When the complainant contacted the opposite parties, they gave a Cover Note No. B/198744 dated 1.5.1990 and the complainant accordingly addressed a letter to the second opposite party about the damages that suffered by its un...

Sms Schloemann Siemag, A.G., Mumbai Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2001(3)ALD733; 2001(3)ALT355

ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ 1. Reference to this Bench has been made by a Division Bench of this Court having regard to the importance of the question as regards the interpretation of Section 220(2) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act' for brevity). Although all the writ petitions involve a similar question of law, factual matrix of the matter shall be considered from Writ Petition No.6112 of 1996.2. The writ petition relates to the assessment year 1984-85 and the original demand of assessment was made on 27-3-1987. The entire amount of tax was paid. But the order of assessment was questioned in an appeal. The said appeal of the assessee was allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by an order dated 31-3-1989. The assessee made a demand of refund of the amount with interest, pursuant whereto the amount was refunded along with interest in terms of Section 244 of the said Act on or about 28-7-1989. The department preferred an appeal there against before the...

V.R. Industries, Tea Packing Unit (Duncans) Vs. Superintendent of Cent ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2001(4)ALD86; 2001(3)ALT731; 2001(133)ELT306(AP)

ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed seeking directions to refund excise duty of Rs.7,79,584-96 ps. which the petitioner has paid for the period from April, 1981 to January, 1983. It is the petitioner's case that the said amount was paid under mistake and on wrong demand made by the excise authorities and on coming to know that it was not liable to pay, it had made several representations, but of to no avail and at last invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. M/s. Duncan Tea Sales Limited, Calcutta is the manufacturer of the tea and the said loose tea is sent to the petitioner for packaging varying in weight from 3 grams to 500 grams and after the said package, the petitioner delivers back the said tea in packages to M/s. Duncan Tea Sales Limited. The loose tea sent by M/s. Duncan Tea Sales Limited had already suffered excise duty. But, the petitioner was made to believe that for packaging also, he needs to ob...