Andhra Pradesh Court February 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.
M. Venkata Subba Reddy Vs. State Bank of India, Reptd. by Its Asst. Ge ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD684; III(2003)BC430
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri G. Ramesh, counsel representing Sri S.V. Bhatt, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri M. Narender Reddy, the learned counsel for the respondent.2. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed as against an order passed in I.A. No. 639/2001 in O.S. No. 88/2001 dated 9-7-2002 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Cuddapah. The order impugned reads as hereunder:'This petition was filed by the learned Counsel Sri M. Nageswara Reddy. On perusal of the material on hand, there is no Vakalath for M. Nageswara Reddy, as such the very petition itself is not maintainable. Hence the same is dismissed, but no costs'.3. The facts in nutshell are as follows:The defendant in O.S. No. 88/2001 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Cuddapah filed I.A. No. 639/2001 praying for the relief of setting aside the exparte decree dated 28-8-2001 passed against him and receive the written statement and dispose of the matter on merits in the interest of justice. The respondent in the app...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Coromandel Fertilizers Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT338; (2003)182CTR(AP)264; [2003]261ITR408(AP)
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, at the instance of the Revenue, referred the following question of law to this Court for its opinion:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the cement unit could be said to have commenced business during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1983-84?2. The short facts which have given rise to the above question may have to be briefly noticed: The assessee is a public limited company. The assessment year is 1983-84. The previous year ending on 31-12-1982 is relevant to the assessment year 1983-84. The assessee is carrying on business of manufacture and sale of fertilizers as well as cement. During the year 1982 the assessee claims to have commenced limestone mining activity for the production of cement. It had claimed expenditure of certain amounts (excluding depreciation) incurred as an allowance deduction in the computation of the total income. The claim of the assesse...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Officer Vs. N.T. Rama Rao Per Lrs
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALT591; (2003)182CTR(AP)625; [2003]261ITR611(AP)
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J. 1. The question referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad in this reference reads as follows:Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in coming to the conclusion that conditions precedent for assuming jurisdiction under Section 25(2) of the Wealth Tax Act are not satisfied in the case?2. The facts giving rise to the question are briefly these: The assessee was an individual and the respective valuation dates are 31-3-1982, 31-3-1983 and 31-3-1984. The assessee submitted wealth tax returns disclosing negative wealth. He claimed exemption in respect of the value of annuity policies on the basis of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order dated 3-1-1983 for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 in his own case.3. As on respective valuation dates, the assessee was stated to have held annuities of the value of Rs.38,09,898/-, Rs.39,09,562/- and Rs.36,89,575/-. The simple claim of the assessee was th...
B. Mohan Vs. the Sub-inspector of Police, Prohibition and Excise P.S. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD(Cri)727; 2003CriLJ2436
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner assails the order of the third respondent dt.6.3.2000 confirming the orders of the second respondent dt.14.8.1999 whereby and whereudner the petitioner's motor car bearing No. KA 34-M 355 was confiscated to the State under Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the A.P. Prohibition Act, 1995 (for short 'the Act').2. The petitioner is the owner of the car bearing No. KA 34-M 355. On 24.7.1999 the Sub Inspector of Police, C. Belagal stopped the car of the petitioner at Mudumala - Polakal cross-roads at about 5 p.m. for the purpose of conducting vehicle check. On inspection, he found 14 polythene bags containing 4,027 arrack sachets. On inquiry, it was revealed that the driver is one Badigeri Nagaraju and the owner is Balu Basappa Mohan, who was traveling in the car. Interrogation revealed that the owner and the driver of the car purchased the arrack sachets from the arrack godown situated besides Sangam talkies of Bellary and started from Bellary for sellin...
Koudagani Rajeshwar Rao and anr. Vs. Gandu Sammaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALT516
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. I.A. No. 60 of 2003 filed under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. seeking amendment of the written statement was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that permission to amend pleadings cannot be granted after commencement of the trial. Hence, this Revision.2. Respondent filed the suit for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property from the revision petitioners, alleging that the first petitioner who had taken the suit property on oral lease and is continuing in possession thereof as a tenant holding over is trying to induct third parties into possession thereof on the basis that he himself is the owner of the property. The First Petitioner filed his written statement denying the title of the respondent to the suit property and alleging that he prescribed title to the suit property by adverse possession.3. After the trial of the suit was taken up, revision petitioners filed I.A. No. 60 of 2003 seeking permission to incorporate a...
S.S. Ramachandra Rao Vs. Singareni Collieries Company Limited and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD155; 2003(3)ALT707
ORDERR. Subhash Reddy, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed questioning the order dated 8-3-1997 issued in Proceedings No. C/38/391 by the Director, Personal Administration and Welfare, Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Kothagudem, Khammam District, the second respondent herein. By the impugned order,the name of the petitioner was struck off from the rolls of the company with effect from 25-10-1996 stating that he abandoned the employment on his own accord.2. Necessary facts for disposal of the Writ Petition are as under: The petitioner joined the service of the respondent-company on 18-12-1961 and he was promoted as Personal Manager in the month of May, 1990. In the month of October, 1996 he reported sick at company's dispensary and he was referred to area hospital on 24-10-1996. Further he has stated in his affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition that in view of his sickness, he came to Hyderabad where his wife and children are staying and took treatment at Government Hospita...
Lic of India Vs. Vaila Lakshmi Bai and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD294; 2003(3)ALT698
V.V.S. Rao, J. 1. Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter called, the plaintiff) filed a suit being O.S. No. 574 of 1984 on the file of the Court of I Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 37,810.50 ps. from the defendants. The trial Court by judgment dated 8.7,1988 decreed the suit for Rs. 34,547.74 ps. denying interest as well as penal interest claimed by the plaintiff. Therefore this regular appeal is filed. 2. The facts are not much in dispute except some controversy regarding alleged payment made by the defendants. Briefly stated the facts are as follows. The defendants applied for loan of Rs. 50,000/-on 12.4.1971 for construction of a house, repayment of the existing loan and investment in business. The plaintiff sanctioned Rs. 40,000/- as loan on 28.6.1971. The defendants executed a registered mortgage deed on 5.9.1971 mortgaging their land and house. The amount was duly disbursed by cheques. An additional loan of Rs. 10,000/-was sa...
Dilip Mehra and anr. Vs. Visakha Industries Limited and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD728; 2003(3)ALT421
ORDERG. Rohini, J. 1. These three Civil Revision Petitions are directed against the orders in I.A. No. 2278 of 2001, I.A. (SR) No. 1321 of 2002 and I.A. (SR)No. 1322 of 2002 respectively. Since all the said applications arise out of O.S.No. 19 of 2000 on the file of the Court of the 1st Additional Chief Judge, Secunderabad the same are heard together and decided by this common order.2. The petitioners in all these revision petitions are the defendants who suffered an ex prate decree. The plaintiff who is the 1st respondent in all the Revision Petitions tiled the suit for recovery of Rs. 8,73,165.26 Ps alleged to be due from the 1st defendant-Company. The 2nd defendant was the Managing Director of the 1st defendant-Company, whereas the defendants 3 and 4 are the Directors. The suit was decreed ex parte on 13.6.2000. The defendants 2 and 4 filed an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of Civil Procedure Code to set aside the ex parts deeree along with another application under Section 5 of...
Sayeda Peerani Begum and ors. Vs. Hyderabad Secunderabad Nai Sena Sama ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALD492
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. The petitioners herein are defendants 3 to 6 in O.S. No. 1507/1996 filed by the 1st respondent herein on the file of the VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for declaration of the title in respect of suit property situated at Devdi Mama Jumla, Hyderabad in an extent of 213 Sq.yds alleging that an area of 122.6 Sq.yds belonging to one Syed Mohd Hussain sold the said property to Smt. Basanti Bai through a registered sale deed dated 6-7-1960 for a sum of Rs. 96/- and also sold, another extent of 91 Sq.yds to Sri Mannalal on 18-3-1960 for Rs. 96/-.2. It appears that several disputes are pending among the parties leading to filing of the Rent Control Cases. The petitioners herein filed an application under Order 18 Rule 17 read with 151 Code of Civil Procedure to recall PW-1 (Duli Chand) for cross-examination on behalf of defendants 3 to 6 on the grounds that they could not cross-examine PW-1 as their Counsel was out of station due to which...
Sri Rama Oil Company Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: [2006]143STC18(AP)
C. Venkataramulu, J.1. The main question, inter alia, arises for consideration of this Court, under the given circumstances of this case, is that :Whether the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, was right in revising the order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) under Section 20(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 and setting aside the said order and restoring the order of the Commercial Tax Officer, Podili ?2. The brief facts noticed are as under :The appellant herein, M/s Sri Rama Oil Company, Giddalur, Prakasham district (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'), are the manufacturers of groundnut oil and cake. On February 11, 1984, the Commercial Tax Officer (Intelligence), Nellore, inspected the mill and found variations in the stocks. The assessee had paid both tax and compounding fees. Subsequently, verification as to the particulars of the electricity consumption indicated an additional turnover. The Commercial Tax Officer (Inte...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »