Andhra Pradesh Court October 2005 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.
Soma Ramamohan Reddy Vs. Soma Saraswathi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT484
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court ordered notice before admission on 7-10-2005 and Sri E.V. Bhagiratha Rao entered appearance representing the respondent in Civil Revision Petition.2. In view of the urgency pleaded by both the counsel, Sri K. Raghuveer Reddy representing the revision petitioner and Sri T. Sharath representing Sri E.V. Bhagiratha Rao, the counsel for the respondent, the matter is being finally disposed of at the stage of admission.3. Sri K. Raghuveer Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner/ respondent in O.P.No. 21 of 2003 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, made the following submissions:-The learned Counsel would maintain that invoking the powers under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' for the purpose of convenience) suo motu in the facts and circumstances of the case cannot be permitted. The learned Counsel also would maintain that when the status of the wife itself is in co...
Vuyyuru Venkat Reddy Vs. Karumudi Mangamma (Died) Per Lrs. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2005
Reported in: 2006(5)ALD178
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Vuyyuru Venkata Reddy, the defendant in O.S. No. 370 of 1988, on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada, preferred this appeal, aggrieved by the judgment and decree made- in O.S. No. 370 of 1988, dated 13-8-1996. Karumudi Mangamma W/o Veera Reddy, the defendant in the said suit died and the legal representatives were brought on record. The said Mangamma filed the suit to declare that she is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property and to deliver vacant possession of the plaint schedule property and to render proper accounts in relation thereto. The learned Judge recorded the evidence of PWs. 1 to 4 and DWs. 1 to 6 and got marked Exs. A1 to A. 4 and Exs. B. 1 to B. 35 and also recorded the findings and ultimately decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the same the present appeal is preferred.2. Sri AT. Suresh Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the appellant/defendant had taken this Court through the evidence of DWs. 1 to 6 and also PWs. 1 to 4...
Concap Capacitors Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2005
Reported in: [2006]148STC398(AP)
S. Ananda Reddy, J.1. These tax revision cases are at the instance of the dealers, who are the manufacturers as well as the traders registered under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, 'the APGST Act') as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short, 'the CST Act'), directed against the orders of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal where the Tribunal negatived the claim of the dealers that the item, which they are manufacturing or dealing with, viz., capacitors, is exigible to tax at concessional rate as 'electronic goods' in terms of various Government Orders issued from time to time. As the common issue is involved in all these matters, they are disposed of by this common judgment for the sake of convenience.2. The common issue that arises for consideration is whether the 'capacitors' are to be treated as 'electronic goods' within the meaning of that term under various Government Orders, viz., G.O. Ms. No. 864, dated September 7, 1993...
Shankaramma and ors. Vs. Mohammed Abdul Hameed and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT103
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This is a reference made by a learned single Judge of this Court, through the order dated 21-12-2001. The following are the questions to be answered by this Bench:1. Whether the concept of attornment of tenancy governed by the general provisions of Transfer of Property Act and lessor and lessee relationship be applied to the rent control proceedings under the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960?2. Whether the denial of title can be said to be mala fide in the light of Ex.R-2 and the evidence of R.W.1 to R.W.4 in the present case?2. The matter covered by the above revision petition relates to a dispute under Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short 'the Rent Control Act'),3. We wish to answer the first question, but we are not inclined to answer the second question, which is touching upon the facts of the case.4. It has to be examined whether the concept of attornment of tenancy governed by the gener...
illapu Apparao Vs. Somireddy Chenchunaidu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: AIR2006AP60; 2006(1)ALT303; IV(2006)BC582
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This is a reference made by a learned single Judge with a request to reconsider the Judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Kasi Viswanatham v. Venkata Subba Rao 1984(2) ALT 173 (D.B.) by observing that it is going to have far reaching effect on all the suits for recovery of money, at whatever stage they are pending.2. The learned Judge, during the course of hearing of the revision, encountered a question as to the burden on the party who claims benefit under the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Indebtedness (Relief) Act, 1977 (Act 7 of 1977) (for short 'the Act'). One of the contentions raised before the learned Judge was that apart from proving or otherwise of the fact whether the respondent or his creditor was a small farmer or a rural artisan, the decree becomes a nullity, if an issue was not framed as to whether the debtor was a small farmer.3. The learned counsel for the respondent relied on a Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Kas...
Y. Venkateswar Rao and ors. Vs. Prohibition and Excise Superintendent ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD445; 2006(1)ALT443
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. A short, but interesting question, as to power of the Municipality or Municipal Corporation constituted under A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965 (for short 'the Municipalities Act') and/or the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 (for short 'the HMC Act'), or Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Act, 1979, to insist upon a trade licence by the persons engaged in retail liquor business, arises for consideration. In all these writ petitions except in W.P.No. 14626 of 2002, for the years 1997-1998 and 1998-1999, the petitioners obtained licences in Form IL-24 under A.P. Excise Act, 1968 (for short 'the Excise Act') and A.P. Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor Rules, 1970 (for short 'the Excise Rules'). They paid requisite licence fee and rentals to Excise Department. Some of the petitioners also obtained licences under Section 263 of the Municipalities Act duly paying requisite annual licence fee ranging from Rs. 200 to Rs. 300. However, by the impugned notices, the mun...
Daggumati Malakonda Reddy and anr. Vs. Puligunta Malakonda Reddy and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD784; 2006(3)ALT206
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Questioning the order dismissing the petition filed for amendment of the plaint, plaintiff in the suit filed this revision.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that since the proposed amendment would obliterate the necessity of the revision petitioner filing a fresh suit, and since respondents would not in any way be prejudiced by the proposed amendment, as they can file an additional statement and can contest the claim made in the amended plaint, the Court below was in error in dismissing the petition for amendment of plaint filed by the revision petitioner.3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the respondents is that in view of the amended Rule 17 of Order VI C.P.C. the order of the trial Court dismissing the petition filed for amendment cannot be found fault with because the trial of the suit has already commenced and in any event since the affidavit of the revision petitioner does not disclose the reasons for the proposed...
Bandi China Ramalinga Reddy @ China Ramalingaiah Vs. Nalluri Srinivasu ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD734; 2006(3)ALT205
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. In execution of the decree obtained by the revision-petitioner against the 1st respondent, he filed a petition to attach the retrial benefits to be credited to Account No. 45103 of Andhra Bank as per the despatch order of the District Treasury Officer, Ongole, which was dismissed by the order under revision.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the revision-petitioner is that since 1st respondent is not a Government Servant, and is an employee in a private college, he cannot be invoking Section 60 C.P.C. claim exemption from attachment of the retrial benefits, by placing strong reliance on N. Venugopala Rao v. L.I.C. of India : 1995(2)ALT70 and Md. Sabeer Ali v. Vandana Chit Funds : 2000(1)ALD261 .3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the 1st respondent is that since the retrial benefits to be received by the 1st respondent are his pension and gratuity, and since gratuity which is governed by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (the Act), is exemp...
Smt. P. Himabindu Vs. P. Jayasimharaja
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD44; 2005(6)ALT336; I(2006)DMC118
ORDERG. Chandraiah, J.1. Heard both the counsel.2. The petitioner is the wife. She filed this petition under Section 24 of C.P.C. seeking withdrawal of O.P. No. 13/2004 filed by the respondent, who is her husband, for restitution of conjugal rights and O.S. No. 153/2004 filed by her for maintenance and for return of plaint A and B Schedule articles and documents, both on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Court, Chittoor and to transfer both the matters to Family Court, Hyderabad.3. The petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the transfer petition stated that the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was performed on 18-12-2000 in Hotel Viceroy, Hyderabad as per Hindu customs and rites. Subsequent to the marriage, the respondent and his family members have harassed the petitioner for dowry and the respondent left the petitioner at Hyderabad and the marriage is also not consummated. The respondent with a view to get rid of the petitioner, filed O.P. No. 13/2004 f...
K. Srinivasu Vs. A.P. Co-operative Bank Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-27-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD382; III(2006)BC219
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Petitioner filed this petition seeking a direction to the A.P. Co-operative Bank Limited (respondent bank) to consider his claim as the sole legal heir to the estate of his parents Smt. Swarajya Laxmi and Nageshwar Rao on the basis of the legal heir certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Saroornagar, without insisting on production of a Succession Certificate for releasing the amount covered by the fixed deposits made by his parents in the respondent bank.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that since petitioner is the sole heir to the estate of his parents, as seen from the legal heir certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Saroornagar, who has the authority to issue such certificate, respondent bank insisting on production of a Succession Certificate, ignoring the legal heir certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Saroornagar, for releasing the amounts deposited by his parents in fixed deposits is wh...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »