Andhra Pradesh Court January 2003 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.
N. Gopi Kumar Vs. Director, Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Scie ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD550
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. These two writ petitions can be disposed of by a common order as they involve common questions of fact and law.2. Writ Petition No. 15849 of 1999 is filed by Sri N. Gopi Kumar praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent, namely, the Director, Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences (SVIMS), Tirupathi, in not fixing his pay in the scale of pay of Rs. 2195-4560 as per revised pay scales-1993 as arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. He also seeks a consequential direction to the respondent to re-fix his scale in the scale of pay of Rs. 2195-4560, i.e., the scale of pay applicable to the post of A.C. Plant-cum-Generator Operator ('AC Operator' for brevity) held by him with effect from the date of his initial appointment with all consequential benefits. Writ Petition No. 15993 of 1999 is filed by one Sri K.K. Thulasiram for a similar relief. Before giving a resum of the dates and events leading t...
Epuri Kotaiah @ Joseph Vs. Epuri Ramaiah @ Rayappa and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD564; 2003(5)ALT64
T. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant who filed the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 10-2-1992 passed by the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada in O.S. No. 192 of 1983. He filed the suit for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property or in the alternative for recovery of the value of Rs. 68,200/-with profits.2. The facts lie in a narrow compass: The plaintiff and the 1st defendant are the brothers. Defendants 2 and 3 are the sons of the 1st defendant. The plaintiff, 1st defendant, their another brother by name Epuri Yesu and their mother Sheshamma partitioned their family properties in the year 1952 under a registered partition deed dated 23.7.1952. The properties covered by 'C' and 'A' schedules of the said partition deed fell to the shares of the plaintiff and the 1st defendant respectively. The fourth item of the 'C' schedule is popularly known as 'Komati Venkaiah Gadda' covered by R.S. No. 22/2 measuring Ac.0-72 ...
Syed Ibrahim Vs. the Union of India (Uoi), Rep. by the Secretary to Ce ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ588; 2003(3)ALD851
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. The case of the appellant is when he was proceeding as a pillion on the scooter of his brother, a military jeep bearing No. 84 B 36360-Y came in their opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against that scooter, resulting in injuries to him. He sought Rs. 2,00,000 as compensation from the respondents- the owner of the jeep. Respondents filed a common counter admitting the accident and contending that the accident occurred only due to the negligence of the driver of the scooter who was not having a driving licence. Appellant examined himself as P.W.1 and marked Exs. A1 to A5. No evidence, either oral or documentary, was adduced on behalf of the respondents. Holding that the appellant failed to establish that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the jeep the Tribunal dismissed the OP, even without giving a finding on the quantum of compensation to which the appellant would have been entitled to, had ...
Cable Corporation of India Limited Vs. Sanghi Industries Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: AIR2003AP282; 2003(2)ALD558; [2004]122CompCas615(AP); (2003)3CompLJ216(AP); [2003]44SCL15(AP)
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J. 1. M/s. Cable Corporation of India Limited, represented by its Regional Manager, Sri. Ashok Gupta, has filed these two Company Applications. 2. By C.A. No. 556 of 2002, filed under Order XIII, Rule 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as amended by Act 22 of 2002 (for short 'the Code'), and Rules 6 and 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (for short 'the Rules'), the applicant seeks permission of the Court to produce the list of documents, appended to the application, by condoning the delay, if any, in producing the same. While, by C.A. No. 557 of 2002, filed under the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 read with Section 151 of the Code and Rules 6 and 9 of the Rules, the applicant seeks permission of the Court to produce xerox copies of the Letter of Intent dated 27-1-1995 and the Purchase Order dated 10-7-1995, placed by the respondent. 3. One Sri. K.G. Narasimhan, who claims to be Retainer of the applicant-company, filed an af...
Jayarama Naidu and ors. Vs. M. Nallaiah @ Muthyala Naidu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: AIR2003AP357; 2003(2)ALD687; 2003(4)ALT491
Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 16.12.1997 in A.S. No. 178 of 1991 on the file of 1st Additional District Judge at Chittoor (A.S. No. 98 of 1990 on the file of III Additional District Judge, Tirupati) confirming the judgment and decree dated 17.9.1990 in O.S. No. 124 of 1987 on the file of Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirupati. Defendants in the suit are the appellants.2. Necessary facts for the disposal of this appeal are as follows:Bollini Munaswamy Naidu was the ownerof plaint schedule property. He was havingtwo daughters, namely, Lakshmamma andKamala. He got married both the daughtersto one and the same person by nameMedasani Chengama Naidu. Plaintiff is theson of the first daughter Lakshmamma.Defendants 1 to 3 are the sons of the seconddaughter Kamala. On 30.7.1947 BolliniMunaswamy Naidu and his two sonsincluding P.W.2 executed a registeredsettlement deed Ex.A1 gifting the plaintschedule property to the plaintiff and firstdefe...
S. Yellamma and ors. Vs. S. Anjaneyulu and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD874; 2003(3)ALT530
V.V.S. Rao, J. 1. This regular appeal is by the plaintiffs, against the judgment and decree in O.S. No.168 of 1981, dated 13.10.1986 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Madanapalle. The first plaintiff is wife and plaintiffs 2 and 3 are daughters of first defendant. The suit was filed for maintenance at the rate of Rs.300/-per month and for marriage expenses for plaintiffs 2 and 3 at the rate of Rs.30,000/-each. The trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the first defendant is not guilty of desertion or abandonment of first plaintiff, and also on the ground that the first plaintiff was not entitled to live separately. The pleadings in brief may be noticed by referring to the parties as they are arrayed in the suit. 2. The first plaintiff and the first defendant lived together along with their children till about two months prior to the date of filing of the suit. The first defendant joined hands with second defendant, who poisoned the mind of former carrying tales...
Korada Appalanarasamma Vs. Kinthali Varahanarasimhamurthy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: AIR2003AP294; 2003(4)ALT584
D.S.R. Varma, J.1. This judgment, according to Law, based on the legal material placed by both the parties, on Record, arises out of a Second Appeal, filed by the sole appellant, against Rule 1 to Rule 8, under Section 100, CPC, questioning the, validity and legality, of the adjudications made by, and set forth in para 2, infra.2. Judgment and Decree, both, dated 23-2-1995, of the Court of the Addl. District Judge, Vizianagaram, made in A.S. No. 39/93, of its file, confirming, in toto, the earlier judgment and Decree, both, dated 29-10-1992, of the Court of the District Munsif (re-designated as Junior Civil Judge), Cheepurupalli, made In O.S. No. 75/85, of its file.3. Perused the material papers of the Record.4. Arguments were heard.5. The sole appellant in this Second Appeal corresponds to the sole appellant in the said A.S. No. 39/93, of the said First Appellate Court and D.5 in the said O.S. No. 75/ 85, of the (sic) of the said trial Court. Rule 1 in this Second Appeal corresponds t...
Hyderabad Chem. and PharmA. Works P. Ltd. Vs. Alco Chem. Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(156)ELT638(AP)
V.V.S. Rao, J. 1. M/s. Hyderabad Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works Limited, a company registered at Hyderabad (hereafter called 'the plaintiff') filed a suit against M/s. Alco Chemicals Limited having registered office at Seohare, Bijnore District, Utter Pradesh (hereinafter called 'the defendant') being O.S. No. 491 of 1985 on the file of the Court of I Additional Special Judge, S.P.E. and A.C.B. Cases-cum-Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. In the suit they prayed for a decree for an amount of Rs. 82,929.56 ps. from the defendant. The amount claimed includes interest component of Rs. 22,175.21 ps. on the principal amount of Rs. 60,754,35 ps. The principal amount was allegedly export duty collected by the defendant from the plaintiff. The trial Court by judgment and decree dated 5-12-1988 decreed the suit for an amount of Rs. 82,929.56 ps. with interest at 18% per annum from the date of the suit i.e. 9-6-1980 till the date of decree, and 6% per annum from the date of decree...
Alco Chem Ltd. Vs. Hyderabad Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: III(2003)BC508
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. M/s. Hyderabad Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works Limited, a company registered at Hyderabad (hereafter called 'the plaintiff) filed a suit against M/s. Alco Chemicals Limited having registered office at Seohare, Bijnore District, Uttar Pradesh (hereinafter called 'the defendant') being O.S. No. 491 of 1985 on the file of the Court of I Additional Special Judge, S.P.E. and A.C.B. Cases-cum-Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. In the suit they prayed for a decree for an amount of Rs. 82,929.56 ps. from the defendant. The amount claimed includes interest component of Rs. 22,175.21 ps. on the principal of amount of Rs. 60,754.35 ps. The principal amount was allegedly export duty collected by the defendant from the plaintiff. The Trial Court by judgment and decree dated 5.12.1988 decreed the suit for an amount of Rs. 82,929.56 ps. with interest at 18% per annum from the date of the suit i.e. 9.6.1980 till the date of decree, and 6% per annum from the date of decre...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Y. Narayana Murthy (Decd.) (by Legal Re ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: [2004]270ITR275(AP)
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', referred the following two questions for our opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that there was a valid partnership in law and consequently the assessee was entitled to registration and continuation of registration for the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81, respectively 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the letting out the godown would amount to carrying on of business within the meaning of the Partnership Act disregarding the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in R.C. No. 118 of 1980, dated November 29, 1984, in the case of CIT v. Phabiomal and Sons : [1986]158ITR773(AP) ?'2. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Visakhapatnam, vide his order dated March 20, 1984, took the view that the income derived from letting o...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »