Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
Polisetty Venkateswarlu Vs. Atmakuri Mallikarjuna Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD129; 2005(4)ALT449
ORDERElipe Dharma Rao, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act'). The petitioner herein who is the landlord, seeks to assail the judgment, dated 20-8-2003, passed in R.C.A. No. 3 of 1999, on the file of the Court of Appellate Authority under Rent Control Act (Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur), allowing the R.C.A., by setting aside the order dated 18-1-1999 in R.C.C. No. 55/93 on the file of the Rent Controller-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Guntur, whereby the learned Rent Controller allowed the R.C.C. filed by the petitioner-landlord under Section 10(2) (i) and (iii), 10(3) (a) (iii) (a) and (c) of the Act, and ordered eviction of the tenant from the schedule premises on the ground of personal requirement.2. The petitioner is the owner of the premises bearing No. 3-11-9/5, situated at Main Road, Pattabhipuram, Guntur (hereinafter referred to as the petition sched...
P. Rajalingam Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Endowments and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD1; 2005(3)ALT348
Devinder Gupta, C.J.1. Challenge by the appellant is to the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing Writ Petition No. 1132 of 2005 on 31st January, 2005.2. Facts in brief are that appellant-petitioner has filed O.A. No. 1 of 1986 under Section 87 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') before the 1st respondent-Deputy Commissioner of Endowments seeking declaration that property in question does not belong to Tulja Bhavani Temple and it is his personal property. After making necessary enquiries and hearing the parties, the 1st respondent passed an order on 26.4.2000. As per the provisions of Section 87 of the Act, any decision or order of Deputy Commissioner on confirmation by the Commissioner is required to be published in the prescribed manner and any decision or order of Deputy Commissioner deciding whether an institution or endowment is not a public institution or endowment as per Sub-sect...
Dasuputruni Suryanarayana Vs. Dasuputruni Adinarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALT87
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 9-8-2004, made in I.A.No. 2877 of 2003 in O.S.No. 18 of 1996 on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge's Court, Anakapalle.2. Learned Judge allowed the application filed by the respondents/defendants under Order VIII Rule 1-A(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure to receive the documents. The document No. 1 that is sought to be filed is the sale agreement, dated 2-3-1995, and the document No. 2 is the sale deed, dated 16-10-1995. The petitioner herein filed counter in the trial Court contending that the document No. 1, sale agreement, dated 2-3-1995, is the possessory agreement and it has to be charged as a sale deed and it also requires registration. The application is filed belatedly to protract the litigation.3. The trial Court having examined the contents of the document found that the document No. 1 sought to be filed into the Court is the agreement of sale, dated 2-3-1995, wh...
P. Chandra Mouli Vs. Govt. of A.P., Dept. of Home and ors. Overruled
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD663; 2005(3)ALT162
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. When the matter came up for admission and hearing at the request of the Counsel on record, the matter is taken up for final hearing where the Counsel made elaborate submissions and in view of the same, the Writ Petition is being disposed of finally at the stage of admission.2. Sri P. Chandramouli, Assistant Commissioner of Police (now under suspension), filed the present Writ Petition questioning the Order made in O.A.No. 589/ 05 dated 24-2-2005 on the file of A.P. Administrative Tribunal, in short referred to as 'Tribunal' for the purpose of convenience. The Order impugned in the Writ Petition is as hereunder:'In this O.A. the applicant is challenging the suspension order.As per Rule 33 of APCS (CCA) Rules, the applicant has a right of appeal. Therefore, this OA is disposed of, with a direction to the applicant to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority within two weeks from to-day and on such appeal being filed, the respondents shall dispose of the sa...
C.V. Raghavaiah and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Finance Departme ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALT435
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. The petitioners 1 and 2 joined as Judicial Members on 24-10-2000 and 3-11-2000 respectively. Prior to joining the Special Court, they had retired as District Judges on 30-9-2000 and 30-6-1999 respectively. Petitioners 3 and 4 joined as Technical Members on 19-10-2000 and 1-11-2000 respectively. Prior to joining, they had worked as Chief Engineers in A.P. TRANSCO and retired with effect from 30-6-1999 and 31-10-2000 respectively.2. The writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate order or direction to declare the action of the respondents in not fixing the pension of petitioners at Rs. 14507- per annum and not revising and granting the enhanced pension to the petitioners @ Rs. 4716/- p.a. after amending Rule 8(2) of Conditions of Service Rules for Chairman and Members as per pension being paid to Members of A.P. Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as APAT) and consequently to effect payment of pension accordingly and the petiti...
S.U.M. Prasad Vs. A.P. State Federation of Co-operative Spinning Mills ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD649; 2005(4)ALT278
G. Bikshapathy, J. 1. The writ petition is filed challenging the order of dismissal passed by the 1st respondent in Proceedings No. 863/90-A, dated 30-8-1990 as confirmed by the appellate authority.2. Petitioner was selected as Mill Manager by the Federation of Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Spinning Mills Limited and he was posted to Rajahmundry Spinning Mills by an order dated 28-7-1987. He was appointed in the scale of Rs. 1800-75-2400 1800-75-2400 with other allowances as admissible. He was governed by the Rules and Regulations framed by the Federation. The appointment order, however, contained that the appointment was on contract basis for a period not exceeding three years and he was put on probation for a period of one year. After completion of the probation, increments were also released to him.3. While so, he was placed under suspension on 25-4-1990 alleging certain irregularities in discharge of his duties. Thereafter, an Enquiry Officer was appointed to conduct enquiry into the...
Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors. Vs. A. Hanumantha Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD780; 2005(2)ALT653
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.Introduction :1. The manufacturing or of supplying by wholesale or of both or of selling by wholesale or by retail, any liquor in the State of Andhra Pradesh is governed by Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 (for short 'the Act'), and the grant of licences for the import, export, transport and sale of Indian liquors, and foreign liquors is regulated by the Andhra Pradesh Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor Rules, 1970 (for short 'the ILFL Rules'). The Government of Andhra Pradesh has been taking policy decisions from time to time enunciating liquor policy of the State every year. Section 17 of the Act provides that the Government may grant a licence for a fixed period subject to such conditions as they may deem fit to impose to any person at any place a lease or licence, or both for the exclusive privilege of manufacturing or of supplying by wholesale or of both; or by selling by wholesale or by retail; or by manufacturing or of supplying by wholesale or of both and of ...
Account General and ors. Vs. P.K. Sinha
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD106; 2005(3)ALT371
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Respondents-The Accountant General, Nagpur, Madhya Pradesh and others in O.A. No. 670 of 2004, aggrieved by the order made in the aforesaid OA dated 30.11.2004, had filed the present writ petition.2. Respondent-applicant in the OA belongs to Indian Revenue Service (IRS) of 1968 batch and entered into service on 11.11.1968 as Income Tax Officer (Group-A) and the respondent-applicant while working as Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam submitted a representation dated 22.10.2002 to the Director General, National Academy of Direct Taxes, Nagpur, stating that his Service Book prepared during his training at Nagpur wrongly recorded his date of birth as 15.3.1945 instead of 15.8.1945 and requested for correction. It is further stated that his date of birth i.e., 15.8.1945 is being shown in the civil list of IRS circulated from time to time. The said representation was forwarded to the Central Board of Direct Taxes (hereinafter in short referred to as CBDT), Mi...
Syed Fahim Arif and anr. Vs. Rahmatunnisa Begum and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD545
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. Introduction: Challenge is made by the unsuccessful appellants/plaintiffs who were non-suited by the learned VII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O.S. No. 318/96 dated 28-1-2002. The suit was instituted by the appellants/plaintiffs for declaration that they are the lawful owners of premises bearing No. 8-2-624/A/1/2 and 8-2-624/A/1/3, between Road Nos.10 and 11 of Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, formerly known as Plot No. 83 in S. No. 1 17, Shaikpet Village, within Hyderabad West, for a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents/defendants, their men, agents and servants from making any construction, for a mandatory injunction to demolish and remove the constructions already made and also for such other suitable reliefs. The learned Judge recorded the evidence of the 1st plaintiff as PW-1 and also the evidence of DW-1, the 1st defendant, had been recorded on Commission. Exs.A-1 to A-14 and Exs.B-1 to B-15 were marked on behalf of the respective p...
Depot Manager, Apsrtc and ors. Vs. Chairman, Industrial Tribunal-cum-p ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALT160
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri R. Manmadha Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-corporation and Smt. Chaya Devi and Smt. Shanthi Neelam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting respondents.2. Since common question arises in all these matters, they are being taken up together for disposal.3. The petitioners in all these Writ Petitions filed these Writ Petitions, inter alia, seeking for a Writ of Certiorari, challenging the common award of the first respondent herein dated 19-6-2004 in favour of the respective second respondent in each of the cases in pursuance of a reference of a dispute under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.4. The facts not in dispute are that the contesting second respondent in these Writ Petitions were selected and appointed as casual drivers. The conditions of selection contemplate possessing at least 3 years' of experience with a valid driving licence prior to date of appointment. The case of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »