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.
Macha Srinivasa Rao Vs. Macha Anasuryamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT246
Tamada Gopalakrishna, J.1. Revision Petitioner herein is the 1st defendant in the suit. He preferred this revision against an order passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem, allowing I.A.No. 740 of 2001 in O.S. No. 9 of 1991, which was filed for summoning one Mr. B. Ramachandraiah, Advocate for the 2nd defendant in the suit (2nd respondent herein) who allegedly attested the will (Ex.A-1) executed by the husband of the plaintiff.2. The facts that led to the filing of this revision are that the 1st respondent herein, who is the plaintiff in the suit, is the second wife of one late Macha Komaraiah. Late Komaraiah is the father of the revision petitioner (1st defendant). The 2nd respondent herein (2nd defendant) is the adopt son of the said late Komaraiah. According to the plaintiff, the said late Komaraiah executed a will (marked as Ex.A-1 in the suit) in her favour in the year 1981 bequeathing certain property and that one Sri B. Ramachandraiah, Advocate, is one of the attest...
Kottam Pullaiah (Died) Per Lrs. Vs. Harijan Panganti Eaga Balaiah and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD805
ORDERDubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. This revision petition is filed by the decree holders - plaintiffs in O.S. No. 45 of 1980 on the file of the District Munsif, Wanaparthy, questioning the order dated 19.3.2001 in E.A.No. 15 of 2000 in E.P.No. 12 of 1996 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy.2. Necessary facts for the disposal of this revision petition are as follows:The revision petitioners were having land in Sy.No. 115. It was acquired by the Government for the purpose of constructing a well in a tank named as Gundla Cheruvu. In lieu of the acquisition of the land belonging to the revision petitioners in Sy.No. 115, the Government assignedsome other land to them in Sy.Nos. 10-A and 10-B. Later, on the ground that the defendants in the suit were obstructing the enjoyment of assigned land by the plaintiffs, they filed a suit in O.S.No. 45 of 1980 seeking declaration of their title and for perpetual injunction against the defendants. The District Collector, Mahaboobnagar, and th...
Shaik Basheer Ahmed and ors. Vs. Sardar Mahender Singh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD572; 2003(2)ALT414
ORDERR. Subhash Reddy, J. 1. This revision raises an interpretation of the words 'for his own occupation' used in Section 10 (3)(i)(b) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 ('the Act' for brevity) and whether such words would apply for personal use of the landlord alone or for his requirements also. The said question arises under the following circumstances. 2. The petitioners herein, who are brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased, sole petitioner in RCC No. 40 of 1980 on the file of the Rent Controller-cum-Principal District Munsif, Warangal, arethe landlords of the petition schedule premises bearing Municipal No. 14-2-102, 14-2-103 and 14-2-104 and the respondent herein is the tenant. Originally the deceased-landlord filed the application seeking eviction of the tenant on the grounds of wilful default in payment of rents and also on the ground that the landlord needs the petition schedule premises bona fidely for providing accommodatio...
Apsrtc Vs. K. Kumar Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD788; 2003(2)ALT123
Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. The APSRTC filed this appeal against the Award dated 5-11-1999 passed in M.V. O.P. No. 377 of 1997 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Kurnool.2. There was a collision between two vehicles, namely a car bearing registration No. AP-21C-4334 belonging to the claimant- respondent and APSRTC bus bearing No. AP-9Z-2293, on 8-2-1997 on Kurnool-Hyderabad High way. The car sustained damages as a result of the accident. The respondent-claimant filed the claim application seeking compensation of Rs. 2,35,100-00 on the ground that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of RTC Bus Driver. APSRTC disputed its liability. It also disputed that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving by its driver. The Claims Tribunal framed appropriate issues. The claimant examined three witnesses as PWs.1 to 3 in support of his case and marked Exs.A.1 to A.27. The Tribunal granted total compensat...
K. Jawahar Reddy and anr. Vs. State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD195; 2003(1)ALT712
ORDERS. Ananda Reddy, J.1. The 1st two writ petitions are filed by the owners of the property bearing Municipal No.3-4-142/5/A, Barkathpura, Hyderabad aggrieved by the orders passed by the Commissioner and Special Officer, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad dated 23-10-1998 under which the earlier proceedings regularising the construction made by the petitioners were cancelled. The other two writ petitions are filed by two neighbours to the above-referred property complaining violation of the Building Bye-laws and they sought for quashing of the Government Orders in G.O. Ms. No.289 dated 25-5-1998 and G.O. Ms. No.419 dated 30-7-1998 and also the revised permit Nos.172/17/80 and 172/17/79 dated 26-6-1998 as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and also further sought for a direction not to regularise the illegal constructions that were effected in the above referred property. Further a direction was also sought for to the authorities of the Municipal Corporation to take appropria...
Bandaru Satyanarayana Vs. Ganji Suryanarayana Murthy and Rs.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALT596
Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. This appeal is filed against the Judgment and Decree dated 16-1-1998 in A.S.No. 45 of 1992 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at Narsapur confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 15-7-1992 in O.S.No. 364 of 1989 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Narsapur. The 1st defendant in the suit is the appellant.2. Ac. 0-98 cents of land situated in R.S.Nos. 217/5, 217/6, 217/7 and 224 in Kontheru village is plaint 'A' schedule property. The total extent in R.S.No. 217/5 is Ac. 0-16 cents. Plaint 'B' schedule property forms part of plaint 'A' schedule property. Ac. 0-08 cents of land in R.S.No. 217/5 is plaint 'B' schedule property. There is a thatched house bearing assessment No. 87 and door No. 3-87 in 'B' schedule property. Originally Ganji Ganga Raju and Nalam Subba Rao are the joint owners of plaint 'A' schedule property. Ganji Ganga Raju died. After his death, Nalam Subba Rao filed a suit in O.S.No. 102 of 1953 against the legal heirs of G. Ganga ...
B. Durvasulu Vs. Registrar, University of Hyderabad and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD847; 2003(1)ALT633
Bilal Nazki, J. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for petitioner and Mr. V.R.N. Prasant appearing for University of Hyderabad.2. This is an appeal against the judgment of learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 4153 of 1994. The appellant/petitioner field the Writ petition seeking extension of benefit of clause-16 of Section-Ill Miscellaneous of Chapter-II of the Non-teaching Employees Rules of University of Hyderabad. He also sought a direction that he should be treated to have been appointed on regular basis as Office Assistant with effect from 11-1-1977 when he joined duty in pursuance of appointment order dated 8-1-1977.3. The facts leading to filing of the writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed on ad hoc basis on 8-1-1977 as Office Assistant. This appointment was made for a period of six months. It is the case of the parties that in January, 1977 Rules of Service had not been framed therefore many appointments were made on ad hoc basis including the appointment of the petitioner....
Musunuri Anantha Padmanabha Rao Vs. Musunuri Rama Devi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD293
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Siva Ram Prasad, the learned Counsel representing Smt Vijayalakshmi, Counsel for the appellant and Sri K.Harinath, the learned Counsel representing the 8th respondent.2. The present C.M.A. is filed as against an order made in I.A. No. 124/2002 in I.A.No. 453/96 in O.S.No. 119/89 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tenali dated 26-6-2002. The aforesaid application was filed under Order 40 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter referred to as 'Code' in short, for appointment of the Receiver to take possession of the decree schedule A & B properties to auction the leasehold rights for the year 2002-2003 and to deposit the sale proceeds into Court to the credit of the aforesaid suit.3. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the application that the 1st petitioner in the application and certain others filed a suit for injunction and separate possession of their respective shares and the suit was decreed. It...
K.R. Raghu Vs. Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD790; 2003(3)ALT198
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two writ petitions involve common question of fact as well as law. Hence, they are disposed of through a common judgment.2. Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam (TTD) is a statutory Organisation, created under the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams Act, to administer and manage the affairs of the various temples covered under the Act. In the matter of employment, the TTD is obliged to follow the instructions issued by the Government from time to time.3. The Government imposed ban on the recruitment of candidates into various cadres within the TTD during 1978-79. As such no regular appointments could be made. To meet, the exigencies of service, appointments had to be made on NMR or casual basis, on consolidated emoluments.4. The petitioner in W.P. No. 4951 of 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 1st petitioner) came to be appointed on NMR basis on 1-3-1981. The petitioner in W.P. No. 10115 of 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 2nd petitioner) was appointed on dai...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gudivada Ramachandra Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2003
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(AP)543; [2004]265ITR668(AP)
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following questions of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal dated September 25, 1990, in I.T.A. Nos. 1359 and 1360/Hyd of 1987 to this court for its opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty by holding that the ratio of the Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT v. P. Kochammu Amma : [1980]125ITR624(SC) , was not applicable ?2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding and had materials to hold that the assessee was under a bona fide belief that he was not liable to include the share income of his wife from the firm in which he was a partner, even though the assessee had failed to give the information as required by column 13 of the return of income and annexure E of the return of income ?' 2. Before adverting to the question that arises for consideration, it may be necessa...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »