Andhra Pradesh Court August 2002 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.
Rekha Timber Depot Vs. Deputy Commercial Taxes Officer and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: [2003]129STC267(AP)
Motilal B. Naik, J.1. In all these writ petitions, the validity of the first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 19 as well as sub-section (2) of Section 21 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as substituted by Act No. 8 of 1997 with effect from 4-1-1997 is questioned on various grounds.2. Since a common issue is raised in all these writ petitions, they are being disposed of by the following common order.3. Sections 19 and 21 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act') deal with the provisions of appeal before appropriate authorities.4. Section 19 (1) and the First Proviso thereto of the Act provides thus:(1) Any dealer objecting to any order passed or proceeding recorded by any authority under the provisions of this Act other than an order passed or proceeding recorded by an Additional Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner under sub-section (4-C) of Section 14 may within 30 days from the date on which the order or proceeding ...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. G.G. Satyanarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD810; 2003(2)ARBLR391(AP)
Dr. G. Yethirajulu, J 1. Theappellants filed O.P. No. 3 of 2001 against the respondents herein before the III Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 ('the old Act' for brevity) requesting to set aside an award dated 23-10-2000 passed by the respondents 2 and 3 as arbitrators in respect of granting of interest @ 18% per annum from 14-8-1995 to 23-10-2000.2. The petitioners contended that the respondent as a contractor entered into an agreement with the petitioners on 23-11-1993 for supply and stacking of hard stone ballast worth Rs. 18.48.300/-. He could not execute the work as stipulated and the agreement was terminated leading to a dispute between the petitioners and the 1st respondent. On a writ petition videW.P.No. 26673 of 1995 filed by the 1st respondent, the respondents 2 and 3 were appointed as arbitrators by the then General Manager, South Central Railway. The respondents 2 and 3 passed an award on 23-10-2000 all...
Kanda Lingaiah Vs. P. Nirmala Devi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD590
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. The unsuccessful tenant filed this civil revision petition. The respondent is the landlady of the petition schedule property bearing No. 2-6-93/5 situated at S.B.H. Road, Near Clock Tower, Mahabubnagar Town of Mahabubnagar District. The respondent filed R.C.No. 4/1996 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Rent Controller, Mahabubnagar for eviction of the petitioner herein under Section 10(3) (a)(iii)(b) directing to evict the tenant and put the landlady in possession for the purpose of commencing the business by her son and husband. It is stated that the husband of the respondent is a retired employee and son of the respondent was running a medical stores at Santosh Nagar, Hyderabad, he sustained loss and, therefore, she requires the said premises for her bona fide requirement to commence the business by her son and husband. Admittedly, the rent at the time of the filing of the R.C. was only Rs. 1,000/-and the Rent Controller was having the jurisdiction to e...
Goldstone Exports Limited and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD336; 2003(2)ALT288
V.V.S. Rao, J. 1. In the process of implementation of 'Policy of Public Enterprises Reforms', the Government of Andhra Pradesh (GoAP) decided to accept the proposal of Delta Paper Mills Limited (DPML), fourth respondent herein, for a joint venture in respect of three sugar units and a distillery unit as recommended by two Committees. The decision of the first respondent in preferring the fourth respondent to the petitioners' consortium is assailed in the writ petition. The matter was heard at length on 22.4.2002, 25.4.2002, 26.4.2002, 3.6.2002, 4.6.2002, 5.6.2002, 6.6.2002, 11.6.2002 and 13.6.2002 at the admission stage itself as the contesting parities filed their counter-affidavits and made detailed submissions. Background facts in brief:2. The lengthy pleadings and voluminous documents filed in the case reveal the following factual position. (i) Unsolicited proposals of GELCON 3. Nizam Sugars Limited (NSL), which is a Government owned public enterprise, had five sugar units and two ...
Kuna Ramulu Vs. Kuna Annapurnamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD146
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J. 1. The revision petitionerassails the order dated 15-2-2002 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Suryapet in IA No. 40 of 2002 in OS No. 70 of 1996. 2. The petition was filed under Order I Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking to come on record as a supplementary defendant. His case inter alia in the affidavit filed in support of the petition was that the house bearing No. 1-5-120/1 was purchased by his son late Pendam Yadagiri who was in possession and enjoyment of the same and after his demise the petitioner being the father and Class-I heir became the owner and possessor thereof and therefore he was necessary and proper party to the suit. The petition was allowed under the impugned order since the 1st respondent-contesting plaintiff failed to file his counter. It is represented by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the suit having been filed way back in the year 1996 and aforesaid property having been purchased under registered sale deed...
M. Vijaya Kumar Vs. M. Srinivasa Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: I(2003)BC524
T.Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The complainant in CC. No. 339 of 1995 has filed the present appeal against the acquittal. The appellant filed a private complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the first respondent herein who is the accused therein. The complainant and his Counsel were not present on 20.10.1997 and on account of the default on the part of the complainant and his Counsel the Vth Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada on 21.1.1997 acquitted the accused under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. It is represented by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant that the whole evidence was completed and the C.C. No. 339 of 1995 was coming up for arguments and the date of adjournment was wrongly noted as 30th October, 1997 instead of 20th October, 1997 and since the complainant's Counsel was not present on that day, the matter was adjourned to 21.10.1997 i.e., the next day on which date the Court below passed the impugned order dismissing the c...
Kum Kum Lahiri Rao Vs. the President, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar College of Law ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALT320
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In these writ petitions, common question of fact as well as law arises. In that view of the matter, they are disposed of through common order.2. Andhra University had issued notification as regards the admission of candidates into first year for various Post Graduate courses (for short 'PG courses') as well as LL.B.(3 years) full time course, for the academic year 2002-03. For these admissions, the University conducts entrance examinations and candidates are to be selected on the basis of their performance at the entrance examinations. The last date for submission of applications for various PG courses, such as, M.A., M.Com., M.LI.Sc., M.Ed., etc., was 30-4-2002, without late fee and 7-5-2002, with late fee. The entrance test was held on 2-6-2002. For the LL.B., course, there was a different schedule. 3. The University issued a notification dated 23-6-2002 stipulating that such of the candidates who have studied PG courses or have done M.Phil. or Ph.D., are not...
G. Pandari Babu Vs. Chairman, Coir Board and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD486
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. All these writ petitions involve similar question of fact and law. Hence, they are disposed of through common order.2. Coir Board, Kochi, (the respondent herein), which is Government of India Undertaking, had established a Regional Coir Training and Development Centre, at Rajahmundry, in Andhra Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Centre'), in the year 1984. The petitioners in this batch of writ petitions came to be appointed in the Centre, at different points of time between 1984 and 1990, in different capacities. They were sought to be discontinued on the ground that the Centre was expected to function only for a limited period and thereafter was to have been taken over by the State Government. The petitioners had to approach this Court seeking redressal. As a result of the orders passed by this Court, the services of the petitioners were regularised.3. The respondent issued individual orders to the petitioners regularising their services. However, t...
Agam Shanthamma Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Represented by General Manag ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC423; 2004ACJ713; 2002(6)ALT814
Bikshapathy, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the claimant challenging the order dated 25.10.1996 passed in O.A.A. No. 18 of 1996 by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench at Secunderabad.2. A claim was laid by the legal heir of the deceased passenger alleged to have died by accidental fall from train No. 348 while travelling from Zahirabad to Vikarabad. The matter was resisted by the Railways. Basing on the respective pleadings, the Railway Claims Tribunal framed the following issues:(i) Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger? (ii) Whether the deceased fell down from the train and died as a result of the injuries? (iii) Whether the applicant is a dependant of the deceased? and (iv) To what relief? 3. The Railway Claims Tribunal after considering the evidence and the material available on record came to the conclusion that the claimant is the legal heir of the deceased passenger. However, the Railway Claims Tribunal held that deceased was not a bona fide passenger o...
National Remote Sensing Agency Represented by Its Director Vs. the Add ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD211; 2002(4)ALT788; [2002(95)FLR786]; (2002)IIILLJ741AP
ORDERB.Sudershan Reddy, J. 1. In this batch of writ petitions, the question that arises for consideration is: 'Whether the National Remote Sensing Agency is an 'Industry' as defined in Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947?'Factual Matrix: 2. In order to decide the said question, we may have to notice the relevant facts leading to filing of these writ petitions and the events leading to the reference by a Division Bench of this Court to a Larger Bench for resolution of the issue: 3. The respondents in this batch of writ petitions claiming to be the workmen in the petitioner-Management invoked the jurisdiction of the Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-Additional Labour Court, Hyderabad under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') seeking their reinstatement into service on the ground that they were retrenched by the petitioner-Management without following the procedure prescribed under Section 25-F of the Act. 4. The petitioner-Management f...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »