Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Hampi Enterprises, Santhavelur, Varasapalem Mandal, Chittoor Dist. Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALD691; 2001(6)ALT298
ORDER1. As similar questions of fact and law arise in these three writ petitions, they are considered and disposed of by this ' common order. 2. In all these cases, the petitioners specifically seek a quarry lease in respect of different extents of lands in Survey Nos.55/3A, 55/3C and 55/3 of R.L. Puram village, Chimakurthy Mandal, Prakasham District. 3. The minerals in respect of which quarry lease is sought is 'Black Granite' of a category commercially known as Galaxy, which now has a lucrative market both abroad and in India. The individual facts in these writ petitions may be set out briefly as under: WP No.20609 of 2000 : 4. The petitioner seeks restoration of the mining lease granted to him by the lease deed dated 18-6-1990 for a period of 5 years from the date of restoration, in respect of Ac.1.98 cts in Sy.No.55/3C of R.L. Puram village, Chimakurthy Mandal, Prakasham District. 5. On 24-3-1990 the petitioner was granted permission by the 3rd respondent for removing boulder stone...
Major S. Ravi and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALD839; 2001(6)ALT202; 93(2001)DLT647
ORDER1. The petitioners, who are Armed Forces Personnel working in Survey of India - known as Corps of Engineering Officers, question the impugned proceedings issued by the second and third respondents, in not granting general approval for drawing of technical pay to the petitioners as per the instructions issued by the first respondent through proceedings No. 30/(10)/81/D (Pay/ Service) dated 6-11-1984, as illegal, void and consequently to direct the respondents to grant General Approval to the petitioners to draw the technical pay as per the instructions as well as rules issued by the first respondent from time to time.2. The petitioners were originally recruited in Armed Forces known as Corps Engineer Officers thereafter seconded to Survey of India in different capacities i.e., the 3rd respondent organisation. It is stated that though they are working in the 3rd respondent organisation and that the Survey of India is having the rules known as Survey of India (Recruitment of Corps En...
V.P. Thimmaiah Vs. Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Government ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2001
Reported in: 2001(6)ALD201
ORDER1. The petitioner is a wine shop owner in Somendapalli village in Anantapur District. He was granted with an IL-24 licence under the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act for the Excise year 1998-99by the Excise Department. The petitioner then commenced his business in the name and style of M/s. Pawn Wines at Somandapalli village.2. On 7-11-1998 at about 10 a.m., during the raids conducted by the officers of the Prohibition and Excise Department, Hindupur, it was found that a person by name Mangala Maruthi Prasad was standing with a polythene bag at the tank bound situated at a distance of 1 1/2 K.Ms, from Somandapally on N.H.No.7 road. On suspicion, the said Mangala Maruthi Prasad was detained by the Prohibition and Excise Inspector i.e., the 4th respondent herein. On enquiry, .it appears that the said Mangala Maruthi Prasad has stated that he was carrying about 150 arrack sanchets, each containing 100 ml of arrack. It appears that the said person further stated that the said arrack ...
Singamsetty Chikala Ramanna Vs. Singamsetty Saraswathamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2001
Reported in: 2001(6)ALD187; 2001(6)ALT122
ORDER1. The revision petitioner-3rd respondent filed this Revision Petition as against the order made in I.A.No.460/94 In I.A.No.339/93 in O.S.No.117 of 1971 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Gooty.2. The application I.A.No.460/94 was filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein under Order I Rule 10 CPC praying to implead them as respondents 45 to 48 in the final decree proceedings in I.A.No.339/93 in O.S.No.117 of 1971 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Gooty.3. The application was filed to implead the aforesaid parties in the, final decree proceedings since R11, the husband of R1 and father of R2 to R4 died and in the absence, of those parties there cannot be effective representation and the matter cannot be adjudicated upon. The 3rd respondent alone, In the Court below, had filed a counter raising an objection that an application filed to bring on record the legal representatives of Rl 1 under Order I Rule 10 CPC is not maintainable in law and the legal representatives can be b...
Bodapati China Venkata Rao@ Venkateshu and anr. Vs. State of A.P. Rep. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD(Cri)665; 2001(2)ALT(Cri)396
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. This criminal appeal is filed by A-1 and A-2 against the judgment-dated 9.2.1996 made in SC.No.103 of 1993 on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, West Godavari Division at Kovvur in convicting them under Section 376 Clause (2)(g) IPC and sentencing them to suffer R.I. for a period of 10 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.250/- each, in default, to suffer R.I. for a period of 3 months.2. The police registered the case on the complaint given by the victim girl-Nathala Pushpa w/o Peddiraju, aged about 18 years, belongs to Mala Caste, resident of Sitaramapuram Colony, Kovvur. In the said complaint, she stated that in the year 1990, her marriage was performed with the said Peddiraju; and herself and her husband were living amicably by doing agricultural coolie works. On 19.7.1991, she went to coolie work and returned to the house in the evening and cooked food; and her mother-in-law (PW-4) chastised her on the ground that she was cooking more rice unnec...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-28-2001
Reported in: [2001]252ITR316(AP)
B. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, a Government company, has its registered office at New Delhi. It has got one of its units at Ramachandrapuram, Medak District, Andhra Pradesh. The annual returns filed by the assessee-company indicates that its employees were in receipt of interest subsidy which was excluded from the respective salary receipts, for the purposes of computing the tax deductible from their salaries. When the assessee was asked to explain, it filed a reply on March 2, 1995, enclosing thereto a letter dated March 19, 1992 issued by the Income-tax Officer certifying that interest subsidy does not form a perquisite within the meaning of Section 17(2)(iv) of the Income-tax Act. But the Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee-company ought to have considered the interest subsidy as salary income and deducted tax at source under Section 192 of the Act on the whole salary income and since the employer failed to do so, he held that the assessee-compa...
Guna Yerrannaidu Vs. Guna Venkanna
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-28-2001
Reported in: AIR2002AP37
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J. 1. The revision petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P. No. 15 of 1997 in O.S. No. 54 of 1990 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Pathapatnam, Srikakulam District. The execution petition was filed by the respondent-decree holder for realisation of the decretal amount by ordering arrest of the judgment debtor. The Court below after recording the evidence ofthe decree-holder, as P.W. 1 and also the judgment debtor as RW-1 and other two witnesses as RWs. 2 & 3, had arrived at the conclusion that the judgment debtor is having means to pay the decree debt and accordingly ordered issuance of an arrest warrant and the judgment debtor aggrieved by the same had filed the present civil revision petition.2. Sri A. Rama Rao, learned counsel representing the revision petitioner-judgment debtor had contended that the decretal debt, itself, has been discharged and to establish the same RWs. 2 & 3 were examined. But, no doubt, the evidence of RW-2 had been eschewed ...
G. Peddi Reddy Vs. P. Govinda Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-28-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALT342
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. This civil revision petition is filed under section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, rent and Eviction Control) Act, 1960 (herein after, in short, called as 'the Act') by the revision petitioner/tenant, who was unsuccessful in both the courts below. The respondent landlord filed R.C.C. No. 52 of 1984 on the file of the Rent Controller (Principal District Munsif), Warangal in which the trial court ordered eviction of the tenant. Aggrieved by the same the tenant filed R.C.A. No. 7 of 1992 on the file of the learned Rent Control Appellate Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge) at Warangal, which was dismissed by an order dated: 6-4-1992 confirming the order of the court of the first instance. The unsuccessful tenant aggrieved by the said order had preferred the present civil revision petition. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the revision petitioner-tenant (for the purpose of convenience hereinafter called as 'the tenant') obtained the petition schedule pr...
Tangudu Someswara Rao and ors. Vs. State of A.P. Rep., by Its Public P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-28-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD(Cri)626; 2001(2)ALT(Cri)352; 2002CriLJ510
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. The petitioners herein are the Accused Nos. 1,2,4 and 5 in C.C. No. 126 of 1998 on the file of the Judicial I Class Magistrate, Palasa. The prosecution was launched against the accused on the complaint filed under Section 29(i)(a) r/w Sec. 3K(i)(viii) of the Insecticides Act, 1968, and Rule 19 of the Insecticides Rules, 1971. The complainant was examined as PW-1 on 27.11.1998 and the charges were framed on 4.2.1999 and thereafter the case was posted for trial from time to time. At that stage, the revision petitioners herein, who are Accused Nos. 1,2,4, and 5, filed an application in Crl.M.P. No. 1275 of 2001 to stop all further proceedings in the above C.C., and acquit them on the ground that the prosecution did not produce any witness so far and the case is pending trial for more than two years and therefore they are entitled for the benefit of 'Common Cause' cases reported in (1) AIR 1996 SC 1619 and (2) : 1997CriLJ195 . The learned Magistrate dismissed the sa...
Yerneni Venkata Ratnam Vs. State Election Commissioner, Government of ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALD488; 2001(5)ALT354
ORDERS.B. Sinha, C.J.1. A short butinteresting question of law as regards the interpretation of Section 249(1) vis-a-vis Section 143 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act (for short 'the Act') arises for consideration in this application.2. The basic fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.3. The petitioner - appellant was elected as Sarpanch, Kodada Gram Panchayat in Nalgonda District on 22-10-1995 and his term expired on 23-10-2000. The State in exercise of its power conferred upon it underSection 143(3) of the Act took a policy decision to appoint Sarpanchas as persons in-charge. Such power was delegated to the Collector by reason of G.O.Ms. No. 113, Panchayat Raj Department, dated 4-3-1996. The petitioner together with four person were appointed as persons in-charge. While he was so acting in-charge, several charges were framed against him and by reason of the proceedings No. 402/2001/A/Panchayat dated 18-6-2001 he was purported to have been removed from the said Office in terms o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »