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.
Tasleem Murad Vs. Government of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD307
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is a citizen of Pakistan. She holds Pakistani Passport bearing No. 910815, dated 30-10-1998. She obtained VISA from the Government of India, the second respondent herein, travelled to India and arrived at Bombay on 1-3-2001. Her entry into India was marked with R.P.No. 1618/2001 with sticker No. 0226006. She was granted a residential permit by the Registration Officer for a period of ninety days. She came to Hyderabad on 2-3-2001 and married one Mohd. Azmat on 11-3-2001 at Hyderabad. She was granted a marriage certificate pursuant to Shiyanama, In view of the marriage with Mohd. Azmat, who is an Indian national, she applied to the third respondent for extension of her residential permit for a period of one year from 30-5-2001 to 29-5-2002. She alleged that she also made a similar request to the Government of India through the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, the third respondent herein, for extension of her VISA for a period of one year from 30-5-...
K. Srinivas Rao and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Rep. by Its Secreta ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD510
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioners are Inspectors, Sub Inspectors and Head Constables working in the Railway Protection Force (for short 'the Force'). In this writ petition, they challenge the decision of the respondents in ordering closure of the Fire Service branch of the Force and the consequential steps, such as, merger of the Fire Service branch into Executive branch and fixation of inter se seniority consequent on merger. 2. The relevant facts may be stated briefly as under:--With a view to provide protection for and security of railway property, the Force was constituted under the Railway Protection Force Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act'). The Act stipulated the broad structure of the Force and matters connected therewith. Section 21 thereof empowered the Central Government to frame Rules. Initially Railway Protection Force Rules were framed in the year 1959 and Railway Protection Force Regulations were framed in 1966. Subsequently, the said Rules were repealed and repl...
Indian Institute of Architects Vs. A.P. Health and Medical Housing and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD20
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The Indian Institute of Architects filed the instant writ petition praying for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent, namely, Andhra Pradesh Health and Medical Housing and Infrastructure Development Corporation, in awarding Architectural and Engineering Consultancy work/contract for construction of Gandhi Hospital, Hyderabad, to the second respondent company, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as well as the provisions of the Architects Act, 1972 ('the Act'). 2. The first respondent is a Government of Andhra Pradesh Enterprise engaged in the development of health and medical housing infrastructure. It issued a short tender notice No. 10/APHMHIDC/ 2000-2001, dated 30-4-2001 inviting tenders from reputed 'architectural and engineering consultants' with similar experience for providing 'architectural and engineering consultancy' services, inter alia, for the construction of Gandhi Hospital with all...
Chairman, Viskahapatnam Port Trust and ors. Vs. S. Satyanarayana and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD221
S.R. Nayak, J, 1. These writ appeals preferred by the Management of the Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Visakhapatnam, and its authorities are directed against the Order of the learned single Judge dated 4.1.2002 in WP Nos. 15829, 23448, 23449, 23447 and 23446 of 2001. Initially WP No. 15829 of 2001 was filed by the respondents herein seeking the relief as follows:'Hence, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or direction directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to give notional promotions to all the petitioners according to their seniority/eligibility in respect of their cadre and pay the consequential retiral benefits in the said posts with immediate effect on par with the junior reserved candidates as per the decision of the Apex Court which was reported in AIR, 2001 SC 260 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper'.In the said writ petition, on an applic...
P. Vani Sithapathi Vs. Dr. Ch. Srinivasa Sastry
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD669
B.S.A. Swamy, J . 1. This petition was filed seeking interim maintenance to the petitioner and her daughter pending disposal of GMA filed by her against her husband (respondent) under Section 19 of the Family Court Act read with Section 151 CPC against the order of the Family Court, Hyderabad in OP No. 156 of 1997 dated 29-4-2000 wherein divorce was granted to the respondent dissolving the marriage.2. When the matter was listed before this Court on 18-6-2002 we directed the petitioner and the respondent and their daughter to appear before this Court to try for reconciliation. The efforts made by the Court became in vain. In those circumstances, we passed an order on this petition directing the respondent to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month to her minor daughter who is studying 1st year Intermediate and to explain as to why the maintenance should not be granted from the date of petition. On 15-7-2002 the learned Counsel for the respondent sought permission of this Cou...
Prema Ranjit Vs. D.A.R. Sarma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALT739
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. This revision petition is filed challenging the order and decree dated 8-7-2002 passed by the Court of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rangareddy District in I.A.No. 490/ 2002 in O.S.No. 151/1997. By the impugned order, the court below dismissed the petition filed by the defendant No. 1 under Order 3 Rule 1 C.P.C. to summon the second plaintiff for cross-examination. Aggrieved by the said dismissal, the 1st defendant in the suit .filed this revision petition.2. The brief facts are that the plaintiffs filed two suits in O.S.Nos. 151 and 152 of 1997 for specific performance of the agreements. In both the suits, the 1st defendant filed I.A.Nos. 974 and 975 of 1998 respectively to direct the personal appearance of the 2nd plaintiff for the purpose of oral examination and signature. The affidavit filed in support of the present LA. discloses that the defendants expressed an apprehension that 2nd plaintiff was not all in existence and she is a fictitious person. When...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kadakatla Rice Mill
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-2002
Reported in: [2002]258ITR545(AP)
ORDERM.B.N., J.1. This Reference is at the instance of the Revenue aggrieved by the order, dated 29th November,1978 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in I.T.A.No.430/Hyderabad/1976-77 relating to the assessment year 1974-75.2. The assessee is a registered firm deriving income from milling of paddy and sale of rice mainly by export to Kerala State. During the relevant accounting year ending on 12.12.1973, the Income-tax Officer noticed that the assessee had debited an amount of Rs.1,10,534/- to the profit and loss account, being the value of 1,110 quintals of rice seized by the Civil Supplies Department. It was urged before the Income-tax Officer that the Government had auctioned the rice seized by the Civil Supplies Department and as such the loss arising on account of such seizure should be allowed as a deduction during the year of account. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee on the ground that the assessee was not able to adduce any evidence in suppo...
Sayanna and anr. Vs. Thimanna and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD419; 2002(6)ALT219
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. As common questions of fact and law are involved in these two revision petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. CRP No. 2514 of 2002 is filed against the order dated 22-3-2002 in IA No. 286 of 2001 in O.S. No.91 of 1997 CRP No.2652 of 2002 is filed against the order dated 22-3-2002 in IA No.285 of 2002 in O.S.No.90 of 1997, on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Narayanapet.3. The plaintiffs are different, whereas the defendants are common in both the suits. The petitioners - plaintiffs filed the respective suits for perpetual injunction. It was their plea that the suit schedule property was purchased under two registered sale deeds dated 20-8-1988 and that on 10-10-1997 and 12-11-1997, the defendants tried to dispossess them and, therefore, the suits. It appears, initially, there was an ad interim injunction which was later vacated and as on today, there is no injunction against the respondents - defendant...
Gaisetti Tirupathi Vs. Land Acquisition Officer-cum-revenue Divisional ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD564; 2002(5)ALT646
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard Sri Ago Reddy, learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. The matter arises under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'). The writ petition was filed by the appellant to declare the impugned proceedings dated 25-8-2000 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Peddapalli, Karimnagar District refusing to refer the application filed under Section 18 of the Act to the competent civil Court for adjudication of the market value of the land acquired, as illegal and unlawful.2. In the instant case the land belonging to the petitioner-appellant was acquired for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections of the society. An award under Section 11 of the Act was passed on 30-11-2000. A notice under Section 12(2) of the Act was also despatched to the appellant on 11-1-2000 calling upon him to receive the compensation amount within 7 days in the Office of the Reve...
Dilip Kumar Moses Vs. V.J. Cyrice and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC369; 2002(6)ALD127
G. Rohini, J.1. The claimant in MV OP No. 50 of 1989 on the file of the Court of the 1st Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurnool, filed this appeal challenging the award with regard to the quantum of compensation granted for the death of his father in a motor accident.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:The appellant herein filed MV OP No. 50 of 1989 under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- for the death of his father Dr. Purushotham Moses in a motor accident. According to the appellant-claimant on 6.8.1988 while the deceased was travelling in a Jeep along with one Rev. O. George Gnanayudham, a lorry bearing Regd. No. CAS 350 came at a high speed and dashed against the Jeep resulting in the instantaneous death of his father Dr. Purushotham Moses, as well as the other occupant of the vehicle, Rev, O. George Gnanayudham and the driver. The claimant contended that the accident occurred due to the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »