Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(2)ALD631; 2002(2)ALT752
Dr. Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard Sri M. Brahma Reddy, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Sreedhar, the learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The writ petition has been filed to declare the order of the Election Tribunal-Junior Civil Judge, Podili, Prakasam District in rejecting the original petition filed by the writ petitioner under Section 233 of the A.P. Panchayat Act, 1994 on the ground that it is barred by limitation, as illegal and arbitrary and to direct the Election Tribunal to entertain and disposer of the same on merits.The petitioner along with others filed nomination for the election to the post of Sarpanch. The petitioner and the 2nd respondent herein were the contesting candidates for the said post. There is dispute between the parties in regard to the withdrawal of the nomination by the petitioner. In the result the 2nd respondent was declared elected as Sarpanch of the village. Challenging the said declaration the petitioner preferred original petition b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(3)ALD43
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The main question that arises for decision in these writ petitions is whether house property bearing Municipal Door No. 28/49 situated at Subhash Road, Old Town, Anantapur, hereinafter referred to as the 'petition schedule property', is liable to be sold for recovery of wealth tax arrears for the2002(3) ALD May Istassessment years 1982-83 to 1988-89 due from late Nimmalla Appanna. It is stated that N. Appanna and his father late N. Peddanna were Wealth Tax assessees and were residents of Anantapur town.2. It appears that there were wealth tax arrears to the tune of Rs.5.5 lakhs owed by N. Appanna in respect of the assessment years 1982-83 to 1988-89. According to the Wealth tax authorities, the above house properties with appurtenant lands belonged to the joint family and were assessed in the hands of N. Appanna, Hindu United Family (HUF). In connection with the recovery of the said arrears of the wealth tax, the Tax Recovery Officer, Income Tax Department, issued a pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (2002)175CTR(AP)291; [2002]255ITR127(AP)
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The main question that arises for decision in these writ petitions is whether the house property bearing municipal door No. 28/49 situated as Subhash Road, Old Town, Anantapur, hereinafter referred to as the 'petition schedule property', is liable to be sold for recovery of wealth-tax arrears for the assessment years 1982-83 to 1988-89 due from the late Nimmalla Appanna. It is stated that N. Appanna and his father, the late N. Peddanna, were wealth-tax assessees and were residents of Anantapur town.2. It appears that there were wealth-tax arrears to the tune of Rs. 5.5 lakhs owed by N. Appanna in respect of the assessment years 1982-83 to 1988-89. According to the wealth-tax authorities, the above house properties with appurtenant lands belonged to the joint family and were assessed in the hands of N. Appanna, Hindu undivided family (HUF). In connection with the recovery of the said arrears of the wealth-tax, the Tax Recovery Officer, Income-tax Department, issued a pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(4)ALD285; 2003(2)ALT20
ORDER1. In this Second Appeal, an important question of law falls for consideration. The defendant in O.S. No.230/72 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam is the appellant.2. The respondent filed the suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.9996/- through a preliminary decree for redemption of mortgage. The suit was decreed on 31.7.1973. Four months time was granted for the appellant herein for payment of the amount failing which the property was to have been brought under sale. The appellant paid an amount of Rs.3,000/- after decree.3. The respondent filed I.A. No.939/76 under Section 152 C.P.C. for correction of the decree on the ground that the decree drawn by the trial Court was not in conformity with the prescribed form. The I.A. was ordered on 21.4.1979. Thereafter, the respondent filed I.A. No.101/81 on 18.11.1980 for final decree proceedings. The Executing Court dismissed the I.A. as time barred through its order dated 24.8.1983.4. The respondent filed A.S. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(3)ALD766
S.R. Nayak, J. 1. This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 27-10-1997 made in WP No. 24150 of 1997. The appellants are the petitioners in the writ petition.2. The backgrounds facts leading to the filing of the writ petition be noted briefly as under: The petitioners are the owners of the premises bearing No. 11-4-660, Mehar Manzil, Red Hills, Hyderabad. The said property was under lease to respondent No. 2. The 1st respondent issued notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for short) in G.O.Rt. No. 198 dated 3-5-1994, published in A.P. Gazette on 10-5-1994 proposing to acquire an extent of 3050 sq. meters. Thereupon Section (5-A) enquiry was held that the petitioners filed their objections. However, no action was taken. The 1st respondent issued Errata to Section 4(1) Notification published in the press on 19-5-1995 wherein the area was altered as 3780 sq. meters in the place of 3050 sq. meters originally notifi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(3)ALT785
1. These two appeals are at the instance of the defendants against the judgments and decrees, both preliminary and final, in a partition suit in O.S.No.100 of 1983 dated 11-7-1988 and 3-7-1992 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge at Guntur. 2. The suit is filed for partition of plaint A and B schedule properties into two equal shares and for allotment and delivery of possession of one such share to the plaintiffs. Schedule A consists of agricultural lands described as items 1 to 6 admeasuring Ac.9-96 cents and schedule B consists of various movables like bullock cart etc. 3. There is no dispute about the relationship of the parties. One late Chereddy Subba Reddy and Chereddy Yerra Reddy are brothers and sons of Chereddy Veera Reddy. Subba Reddy died in the year 1976 leaving behind his widow, the defendant No.1, one son, the defendant No.2 and one daughter, the defendant No.3. The defendant No.4 is the daughter of the defendant No.3. Yerra Reddy died on 30-1-1983 leaving behi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(6)ALT299; [2003]115CompCas133(AP)
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. The petitioner is a proprietary concern engaged in manufacture and supply of non-ferrous castings. The petitioner obtained amount by way of loan from the respondent-bank. As it was irregular in repayments, the bank filed a suit being O.S. No. 325 of 1995. The suit was decreed ex parte on 6-11-1996 and a preliminary decree was passed. The bank filed an application for final decree. At that stage, the petitioner appears to have filed LA. No. 1068 of 1998 seeking to set aside the ex parte decree. The matter is pending at that stage. In the meanwhile, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) issued a Circular bearing No. BP.BC 11/21.01.040/99-00 dated 27-7-2000 communicating to the Chairmen and Managing Directors of Public Sector Banks certain guidelines for recovery of dues relating to non-performing assets of public sector banks. The petitioner, therefore, made a representation on 13-10-2000 proposing to accept one-time settlement under the RBI Circular. In his representati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(4)ALD113; 2002(5)ALT289
1. One Gaddam Narayan Reddy of Ambaripet Village, Kaddam Mandal, Adilabad District was served with a notice dated 29-3-1994 by the Mandal Revenue Officer, under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 ('the Act' for brevity) as to why action should not be taken against him for allegedly encroaching the Government property admeasuring Ac.8-29 Gts in S.No.199 of the said village. Without filing any explanation to the said show-cause notice, Narayan Reddy approached the Government by way of filing a general revision petition and requested for stay of eviction. The Government were very liberal and by its order dated 19-4-1994, granted stay and advised the Collector to send remarks. After receiving remarks from the Collector, it appears a notice was sent to the said Narayan Reddy who, by that time, was no more.2. By that as it may, the Government issued Memo No. 30428/Asn.II(3)/94-9, dated 6-12-1999 vacating the interim orders placing reliance on the report of the Distri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(2)ALD792
S.R. Nayak, J. 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh and its authorities in the Department of Mines and Geology have preferred this writ appeal against the order of the learned single Judge dated 25-7-2000 made in WP No.27891 of 1998. The respondent herein filed the above writ petition for the following relief:'..........the High Court will be pleased toissue any appropriate writ, order or direction, preferably a writ in the nature of mandamus declaring the Rule 26(3X') of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as well as A.P. Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act and consequently direct the respondents to desist from levying and collecting any amount pursuant to the demand notice N0.752/Q/97 dated 16-9-1998.'The challenge to the validity of Rule 26(3Xii) of A.P. Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short, the 'Rules') should fail in view of the Full Bench decision of this Court in S. Venkates...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(3)ALD30
ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to quash the orders issued by first respondent in Memo No. SE (O) Estt/C1 478/86, dated 11-6-1986 and by the second respondent in Memo No. CEE/ HZ/P2/Misc./D.No. 108/90, dated 7-5-1990. The first respondent vide Memo dated 11-6-1986 ordered that the petitioner is deemed to have resigned from service with effect from 17-9-1983 and he is no more in the Board Service as he absented himself unauthorisedly for more than one year. On appeal by the petitioner, the second respondent vide Memo dated 7-5-1990 confirmed the said order of the first respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed this writ petition.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as LDC in Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board and he applied for leave from 20-5-1983 to 16-9-1983 vide his application dated 18-5-1983, which was sanctioned vide Memo dated 23-9-1983 and the petitioner was informed that he was having 88 d...
Tag this Judgment!