Andhra Pradesh Court March 2003 Judgments

Enterprising Enterprises Private Limited Vs. Government of A.P. and or ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(4)ALD510; 2003(3)ALT18

ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J. 1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring that the respondents have no power or authority to demand and collect dead rent and also cess with regard to patta lands, either at the time of granting mining lease or thereafter and for a consequential declaration that the demand of dead rent is arbitrary and unconstitutional and also for a consequential declaration that the proceedings of the 4th respondent dated 1.4.1997, whereby an amount of Rs. 2,29,590/- was demanded as due towards dead rent and also towards advance dead rent, as illegal and arbitrary.2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the owner of an extent of 2.48 hectors in Chittagudem Muttagudem village, Khammam District. He applied for lease to extract granite under the A.P. Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules, 1966 (for short 'the Rules'). The lease was granted for 15 years and a work order was also executed in Form 'G'. As per the terms and conditions of the lease agr...

Toddy Co-operative Society Vs. Superintendent of Prohibition and Excis ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(6)ALD32; 2003(5)ALT475

ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Heard the Counsel for petitioner and the Government Pleader for Excise.2. Petitioner, which is carrying business in toddy, has licence for three shops and one depot. On 23-1-2003 the Task Force, Hyderabad surprised the depot of the petitioner and took samples of toddy in the depot under a panchanama and registered a case under Section 37(a) of the A.P. Excise Act. On the ground that the samples drawn from the depot are adulterated, Excise Officials suspended the licence not only of the depot from where samples were drawn but also the three toddy shops of the petitioner. Subsequently the licence granted to the petitioner for the depot and the three shops was cancelled by the Excise Officials. Questioning the cancellation of the licences petitioner filed this writ petition.3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the ratio in T. Laxma Goud v. Excise Superintendent, 1979 (2) An.WR 290, cancellation of licence of the three sh...

Chilka Srinivas and anr. Vs. the State of A.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD(Cri)744; 2003(2)ALT(Cri)196; 2003CriLJ4036

ORDERDalava Subrahmanyam, J.1. This Criminal Revision Case was filed by Accused 2 and 3 against the order, dated 8-8-2001, of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kamareddy dismissing Cri. M. P. No. 640 of 2001 filed for deletion of the names of Accused 2 and 3 in the complaint and for discharging them in C. C. No. 794 of 2000.2. The Revision Petitioners-Accused 2 and 3 contended that the Respondent-the State Food Inspector, Nizamabad filed a complaint against them along with A-1 for the offence punishable under Sections 16(1)(a), (i), 7(1), 2(i)(a)(m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short 'the Act') alleging that the sample of sugar boiled confectionary was taken from the shop of A-1 on 15-5-1999 and the Revision Petitioners are the partners and thereby they committed the said offences alleged against them (Revision Petitioners). A letter was addressed to A-1 and A-1 stated that the Revision Petitioners are also jointly carrying on business and on that ground the Revisi...

Tangirala Venkateswarlu and anr. Vs. State of A.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2002(1)ALD(Cri)12; 2003(2)ALD(Cri)261; 2003(2)ALT(Cri)158; 2003CriLJ4034

L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal by A-1 and A-2 in S. C. No, 529 of 1995 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Markaput. They were tried for offence under Section 376(2)(g) of I.P.C. The trial Court found them guilty of the same and on conviction sentenced them to undergo rigorous, imprisonment for .10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.2. The case of the prosecution was that PW-1 is resident of Sunkesula village of Prakasham District. She was married to one Mr. Rangaiah. Having been deserted, she is residing with her mother. On 8-5-1991, she came to the village Gottipadia, where her sister-in-law PW.-2, was residing. On her return journey to her village by walk, at 4.00 p.m. after she crossed some distance, A-1 came from behind and after questioning as to where she was going, caught hold of her. He physically lifted her and took to his Chini garden and laid under a tree of drumstick.' There A-1 and A-2 a...

P. Rajak Sab (Died) Per L.Rs. and ors. Vs. P. Narayanapet Masthan and ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(4)ALT470

P.S. Narayana, J.1. The legal representatives of one P. Rajak Sab, the plaintiff in O.S.No. 76/85 on the file of Principal District Munsif, Adoni are the present appellants in the Second Appeal. The said Rajak Sab instituted the said suit for the relief of permanent injunction against the defendants relating to the land of an extent of Acs.7-55 cents in S.No. 444/D, within the village limits of Mandigiri, Sub-Registration District of Adoni and Registration District of Kurnool. The defendants filed written statements and Issues were settled. Before the Court of first instance, on behalf of the plaintiff, P.W.l to P.W.5 were examined and Bxs.A-1 to A-5 were marked and on behalf of the defendants D.W.1 to D.W.5 were examined and Exs.B-1 to B-11 were marked and apart from the aforesaid documentary evidence, Exs.X-1 to X-11 were marked as third party series. The learned Principal District Munsif, Adoni after answering all the Issues came to the conclusion that defendants 6 to 9 are the owne...

Rayaprolu Rajya Lakshmi Vs. Rayaprolu Ravindranadh Sarma

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(3)ALT429

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The wife-Rayaprolu Rajya Lakshmi had moved the present transfer C.M.P. under Section 24 of C.P.C. against the husband-Rayaprolu Ravindranadh Sarma praying for the relief of transfer of H.M.O.P. No. 264 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur to the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram to be tried along with O.P. No. 87 of 2002 on its file and to grant such other suitable reliefs.2. The petitioner-wife filed an elaborate affidavit and several of the averments made in the affidavit touch upon the merits of the matter, which need not be gone into at the stage of deciding the transfer C.M.P. The respondent-husband filed a counter-affidavit denying the allegations. The wife also filed a reply affidavit explaining certain of the allegations made in the counter-affidavit. Sri V.V.L.N. Sarma, learned counsel representing the petitioner-wife had submitted that the power under Section 24 of C.P.C. being very wide, inasmuch as ...

Sr. Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. K. Nar ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

C.P. Suresh, Member: 1. The unsuccessful opposite parties are the appellants before this Commission. 2. The facts in brief are the complainant obtained a policy for Rs. 20,000/- on payment of premium of Rs. 57.30 ps. Subsequently on the inducement of the opposite parties he converted the said policy into endowment assurance with profits policy for the sum assured payable on 5.9.1996 or at the time of death, and the monthly premium payable from 5.10.1986 i.e., five years after the date of commencement to 5.9.1996 is fixed by the opposite parties at Rs. 163.10 ps. per month. The complainant accordingly paid the premium at the rate of Rs. 163.10 ps. from 5.10.1986 to 5.9.1996. When the policy matured, the opposite parties have issued a cheque for Rs. 19,867/- and they have not paid the amount due under the endowment assurance with profits policy, the complainant, thereupon approached the District Forum. 3. The opposite parties admitted of the conversion of the policy into endowment policy...

Chandana Industries and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD916

ORDERG. Rohini, J. 1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing letter N0.29/1/02/0106/0106/UP, dated 10.1.2003 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and also contrary to G.O. Ms. No.48, dated 20.2.1999 and for consequential reliefs.2. The petitioners who are 14 in number are all Small Scale Industrial Units. The case of the petitioners is that the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O. Ms. No.48, dated 20.2.1999 directing all the local bodies and Government Undertakings to purchase 17 items listed there- under exclusively from the Registered Small Scale Industrial Units. It is one of the incentivesextended by the Government in order to encourage the establishment of local Small Scale Industrial Units. In pursuance of G.O. Ms. No.48, the 1st respondent called for tenders for the purpose of finalisation of rates of the said 17 items mentioned thereunder. About 70 units, includi...

Penumatcha Jaya Rao Vs. Paidipamula Nehru and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(3)ALD26; 2003(3)ALT638

ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. These two revision petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the orders passed by the Election Tribunal under A.P. Gram Panchayat Act, 1994-cum- Junior Civil Judge, Avanigadda dated 18-3-2002 in IA No. 190/2000 and 189/2000 in EP No.8/ 2001 respectively.2. As the parties and facts in both the revision petitions are one and the same, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common order.3. The revision petitioner-(respondent No. l in OP) got elected himself as Sarpanch to the Teluguraopalem Grampanchayat, Ghantasala Mandalam, Krishna District in the elections held on 17-8-2001. The first respondent herein (petitioner in OP) and the eighth respondent contested the election and first respondent (petitioner in OP) who lost the election by margin of one vote challenged the election of the revision petitioner under Section 233 of A. P. Gram Panchayat Act, 1994 before the Election Tribunal-cum-Junior Civil Judge, Avanig...

Enugukonda Venkata Raghavacharyulu and ors. Vs. Pushpagiri Mattam and ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2004AP71; 2003(3)ALD893; 2003(4)ALT466

ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J. 1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order and decree, dated 09-07-2002, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, dismissing the application in I.A. No. 876 of 1997 in A.S. No. 24 of 1995. 2. Petitioners are plaintiffs and respondents are defendants. 3. The plaintiffs who were unsuccessful before the trial court filed an application in I.A. No. 876 of 1997 under Order-47 Rule-27 CPC to receive certain documents as additional evidence before the lower appellate court while hearing and adjudicating the appeal. The said application was dismissed. Hence, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. 4. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as arrayed in the suit. 5. The facts in brief are that O.S. No. 169 of 1987 was filed by the plaintiffs for permanent injunction, which was dismissed by the trial court through judgment and decree, dated 16-08-1995. Challenging the judgment and decree of the trial court, an appea...