Andhra Pradesh Court July 2001 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.
Visakhapatnam Port Trust Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Intelligence and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-2001
Reported in: [2002]125STC294(AP)
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The short question that arises for decision in this writ petition is whether the activity of the Visakhapatnam Port Trust, the petitioner herein, in selling drinking water to various ships stationed in the waters of Visakhapatnam Port area to an extent of Rs. 78,28,096 can be treated as 'business' within the meaning of that term in Section 2(1)(bbb) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957.2. This question arises in the following factual background :The petitioner is a port trust, constituted under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963. It is also a port within the meaning of the Indian Ports Act, 1908. It is charged with the duties and functions enumerated in the above two enactments. To be specific and relevant for the purpose of this case, Section 37 empowers the Board to order seagoing vessels to use docks, wharves, etc., and Section 35 provides that the Board may execute such works within the limits of the port and provide such appliances as it may deem necessa...
Kakani Hanumantha Rao and ors. Vs. Govt. of A.P., Revenue Department a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALT312
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. The petitioners in this writ application have inter alia prayed for the following reliefs:'.... to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the inaction of the respondents in not taking any action for removal of encroachments and stop the pollution from the brick industries in tank and tankbed land comprised in Sy.No. 95 of Addanki Village as illegal and consequentially direct the respondents to take steps for removal of the same to prevent pollution and pass....'2. The contention of the petitioners is that in Survey No. 95 of Addanki Village/ town, several brick industries have been set up as a result whereof the well and the tankbed contained therein are being polluted.3. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have filed a counter-affidavit wherein it has been admitted:'5. In reply to the allegations made in para 6 of the petitioner's affidavit it is submitted that when the Mandal Revenue Officer, Addanki was about to take steps for remo...
G.S. Industrial Gases Private Limited Vs. Managing Director, A.P. Stat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALD319; [2003]115CompCas787(AP)
ORDERBilal Nazki, J. 1. These are three writ petitions which raise similar questions of law, therefore, they are being decided together. In the first instance we proceed to decide the question of law raised and applicable to all the three petitions. One way or the other in all the three writ petitions we have to deal with 'one time settlement' scheme promulgated by the respondents for settlement of recovery of loans. When WP No. 609 of 2000 came up before learned single Judge the Court passed the following order :'The case of the petitioner is that there has been one time settlement between the petitioner and the respondents but the benefits are not being given to him. The respondents submit that the settlement had been reached many years before but for the last five years the petitioner had not paid anything towards liquidation of the loan. As on 31-1-2000 the liability of the petitioner is Rs. 1,38,52,326/-. This Court has been the scheme by which the respondents enter into one time ...
P. Rajender Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALD290
ORDERS.B. Sinha, C.J.1. The validity of order of suspension passed as far back on 15-5-1999 against the petitioner, a Junior Checker in Security Printing Press, Hyderabad is in question in this writ petition.2. In short, the facts of the matter are as under:The petitioner was married to one Smt. Radha Rajender on 21-6-1987 and differences arose between them leading to Radha Rajender leaving the matrimonial home on 21-4-1997. She lodged a complaint against the petitioner on 24-9-1998 for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 494 and 498A IPC and a charge-sheet in respect thereof was filed on 24-11-1998 in Criminal Case No.1583 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, East and North at Kothapet, Rangareddy District.3. The 2nd respondent by reason of the proceedings dated 15-5-1999 placed the petitioner under suspension. The petitioner made a representation on 20-5-1999 to the 2nd respondent narrating the complete facts of the case...
N.V. Chowdary, E-1 Vs. Hindustan Steel Works Constructions Ltd., Visak ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALD728; 2001(6)ALT89
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. A question seemingly of some importance as to what would be the proper forum for enforcing a decree from an award is in question in this application.2. The parties entered into an arbitration agreement. The decree holder initiated proceedings under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 as regards appointment of an umpire as no consensus could be arrived at. The said application was marked as OP No.96 of 1984 on the file of the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam, Sri Justice C. Kondaiah, a former Judge of this Court was appointed as an arbitrator. The aforementionedorder was subject-matter of a civil revision petition before this Court at the instance of the company herein which was marked as CRP No. 3414 of 1984. Instead and place of Justice Kondaiah, Justice Koka Ramachandra Rao was appointed as an arbitrator. The said learned arbitrator passed an award on 24-6-1997. An application purported to be under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was tiled b...
General Manager, SC Railway, Sec'bad and Anr. Vs. Sri Rama Engineering ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(6)ALD191; 2001(5)ALT719
S.B. Sevha, C.J. 1. Whether the High Court would be the appropriate court for entertaining an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for the sake of brevity hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') where an arbitrator has been appointed by the Chief Justice of this Court in terms of subsection (6) of Section 11 of the said Act, is the question which fails for consideration in this petition.2. The first respondent herein, as regards the several disputes and differences by and between it and the petitioners, invoked the arbitration clause culminating in filing an application before this Court under Section 11 of the said Act. The said application was marked as Arbitration Application No.32 of 1998. The learned Chief Justice appointed the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein as joint arbitrators by an order dated 21.8.1998 observing that they would be at liberty to appoint an umpire inthe event they deem fit having due regard to the views of the parties as...
Ramana theatre, Anantapur Vs. Asstt. Commercial Tax Officer-i (E.T.Tax ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: AIR2001AP458
S.R. Nayak, J. 1. The petitioner is afilm Theatre represented by its Managingpartner Sri O.K. Laxminarayana. The petitioner applied for reduction of seating capacity from 342 to 274 in 1st class and from285 to 225 in 2nd class. The said application was rejected by the Joint Commissioner-Licensing Authority, Anantapur, thesecond respondent herein, on 23-6-1987 onthe ground that there would be loss of revenue to the State. The validity of the saidorder of the 2nd respondent was assailedby the petitioner in W.P. 10073 of 1987 in this Court. While entertaining that writ petition on 23-7-1987, in WPMP No. 13422 of1987, this Court passed the following interim order: 'It is further ordered that the respondent herein viz., the Joint Collector, Anantapur, be and hereby is directed to permit the petitioner to reduce the seating capacity in first and second classes of the petitioner's theatre as applied for before the Respondent, pending further orders on this petition.' Subsequently that writ pe...
K. Raji Reddy and ors. Vs. State of A.P., Rep. by the Director of Scho ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALT239
S.B. Sinha, C.J. 1. These writ petitions are directed against a judgment dated 23-4-1999 passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 3629 of 1998 whereby and whereunder the application filed by the petitioners herein was dismissed.2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass. Pursuant to a recruitment notification issued by the Director of School Education dated 15-3-1998 for appointment of teacher, the petitioners applied. The qualification required for the said post was as follows:Secondary Grade Teachers:-- Must possess the qualifications of at least Intermediate Examination conducted by the Board of Intermediate Education, A.P., or its equivalent.Must possess Teachers Training Certificate issued by the Commissioner for Government Examinations, Andhra Pradesh or its equivalent.Candidates with higher qualifications may also be appointed i.e., B.A., B.Ed/ B.Sc., B.Ed.,/B.Com., B.Ed., are also eligible.3. The petitioners allegedly completed B.Ed., course and appea...
Collector and ors. Vs. T. Shivalingam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(6)ALT616
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. The defendants are the petitioners herein who are aggrieved against the orders in LA. No. 834 of 1999 in O.S. No. 336 of 1996 dated 14-7-1999 on the file of the I Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad dismissing the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 414 days in filing the application to set aside an ex parte decree passed in the suit.2. The respondent herein has filed the suit against the petitioners herein seeking damages for the illegal demolition of their house and also preventing reconstruction of the same. Subsequent to the service of summons, the petitioners appeared through the Assistant Government Pleader on 6-11-1996. However, no written statement was filed in spite of ordering costs, which also were not paid. Hence the petitioners were set ex parte on 3-12-1997. It is pointed out that a representation was made by the Assistant Government Pleader that he is not in the habit of paying c...
Sanghi Polyesters Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: 2002(79)ECC542; 2001(134)ELT344(AP)
ORDERS.R. Nayak, J.1. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad-III Division, the 2nd respondent herein, by his proceedings dated 29-1-2001 withdrew the facility of payment of duty on fortnightly basis earlier granted to the petitioner on the ground of default in the matter of payment for 3 fortnights within a period of one financial year. The said order was assailed before the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad. The appellate authority also by its Order No. 57/2001 (II-III) C.E., dated 23-4-2001 dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the Deputy Commissioner. Hence, this writ petition assailing the validity of the order of the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals) dated 23-4-2001.2. The question that arises for decision falls within a short compass. There is no controversy that only if the petitioner commits 3 defaults within a period of one financial year in the matter of payment of duty, then only it would authorize the Dep...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »