Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Vemulapalli Rama Krishna Prasad Vs. Vemulapalli Venkata Narayana Das a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALT648
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 24-6-2002 in I.A.No. 626 of 1996 in O.S.No. 30 of 1995 on the file of additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), Gudivada.2. Petitioner herein is the defendant No. 2 in the suit.3. For the sake of convenience parties to the Civil Revision Petition are referred to as they were arrayed before the trial Court.4. The factual background which is not in dispute is that O.S.No. 30 of 1995 was filed by the respondents/plaintiffs for removal of the present Persons-in-Management of the plaint schedule property belonging to Public Charitable Trust viz., Sri Rama Kamma Beeda Vidyardhi Uchita Bhojana Hostel Sangam and for training scheme for due administration of the Trust and for other reliefs. The said suit was filed under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Section 92 postulates that suit can be filed only with the leave of the Court.5. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petiti...
Sridhar Lime Products Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, No. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-2005
Reported in: [2006]147STC89(AP)
Ramesh Ranganathan , J.1. Can a person, who had earlier appeared as the legal representative of the Government of Andhra Pradesh, (one of the parties to the dispute before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal), hear and decide the very same case, as the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, (revisional authority), on its remand by the Tribunal for de novo consideration? Is the decision taken or order passed by such a person vitiated by bias? These are the questions, which arise for consideration in this writ petition.2. The facts, to the extent necessary for the purpose of this writ petition are that, the first respondent, vide show cause notice dated January 27, 2005, informed the petitioner that the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (S.T.A.T.) had remanded the appeal in T.A. Nos. 1494 of 1999 and batch dated September 28, 2004 for fresh disposal of reassessment, after supplying to the dealers concerned details of extracts of certain relevant documents, since the ...
Kancherla Krishna Rao and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. b ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD547; 2005(5)ALT217
ORDERG. Chandraiah, J.1. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from enforcing the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 (for short 'the Act').2. The case of the petitioners as stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is that the petitioners are having starch mills for the manufacture of starch and the material used for the said manufacture is Tapioca, which is treated as vegetable under the notification issued by the Government -1st respondent under the Act. Petitioners approached various growers of Tapioca and purchased from them during the harvesting season. The further case of the petitioners is that before the scheme of the Act is made applicable, declaration must be made for the notified areas under Section 3 of the Act. Initially, the Government must publish a draft notification declaring their intention to regulate purchase and sale of agricultural produce in the area,...
Mannepalli Mohan Rao Vs. P.V. Ramana and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)907; 2005CriLJ4761
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Alleging that on 15-3-2004 at about 1.30 p.m. petitioner was found brandishing a curved knife on a public road hurling out abuses, giving out that persons coming near would be killed with the knife in his hand and thereby created panic in a public place, the Station House Officer, I Town Police Station, Rajahmundry, registered a case in Crime No. 127 of 2004 under Section 506, IPC and under Section 25 of the Arms Act (for short 'the Act') against the petitioner. This petition is filed to quash the said FIR.2. The main contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is falsely implicated in the case for his having refused to accept the proposal of a compromise mooted by the Station House Officer, (who registered the case against the petitioner) in connection with a family dispute among the family members of the petitioner. It is his contention that since the allegations in the FIR do not disclose that any particular person was threatene...
Englesh Prasad Vs. N. Shravan Kumar
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD54
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The unsuccessful tenant, aggrieved by the reversing order made in R.A. No. 401/99 on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, had preferred the present C.R.P. The respondent herein is the petitioner in R.C.No. 798/95 on the file of III Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, being unsuccessful before the Court of First Instance, the landlord preferred R.A.No. 401/ 99, as aforesaid, which was allowed. As against the same, the tenant filed the present C.R.P.2. C.R.P.M.P. No. 4808/2005 is moved before this Court to implead petitioners 2 to 5 as respondents 2 to 5 in the C.R.P. and pass such other suitable orders. The said application is opposed on the ground that since the learned Rent Controller dismissed the eviction petition, the same had attained finality so far as the proposed parties are concerned, since they were not brought on record and since they had not preferred any appeal. In the affidavit filed in support of the said app...
Santhi Enterprises Vs. Texmaco Limited, Cement Division
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD399; II(2007)BC185
V. Eswaraiah, J.1. Keurd the learned Counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent even after service of notice. The appellant is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff in the suit. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.2. The appeal is filed by the defendant aggrieved by the judgment, dated 27-3-1999, in O.S. No. 59/91, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, in decreeing the suit for a sum of Rs. 73,466/- with costs and future interest.3. It is the case of the plaintiff, that the plaintiff is the supplier of cement. The defendant is the stockist. The plaintiff had been supplying the cement to the defendant and the defendant has been making the payments periodically for the said supply either by cheques or by Demand Drafts. The last consignment was sent on 30-4-1987 under invoice No. 305/60 MTF for value of Rs. 74,928/-. The defendant did not make further payments subsequent to the payment of R...
Sri Balaji Food Vs. State Level Committee and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-2005
Reported in: (2007)6VST707(AP)
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent in cancelling the final eligibility certificate dated October 30, 1998 by the cancellation order dated December 21, 2004 as illegal, without authority in law and contrary to the principles of natural justice. The petitioner accordingly prays for issuance of consequential directions restraining the respondents from proceeding to recover the impugned demand which forms part of the incentive availed by it during the subsistence of the final eligibility certificate for the period from December 6, 1996 to December 5, 2004.2. The petitioner was carrying on business in manufacture and sale of bakery products and is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, 'the Act'). The Government of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O. Ms. No. 108, Industries and Commerce (IP) Department, dated May 20, 1996 announced its new indu...
Supreme Music Vs. Manilal G. Purohit and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD228; 2005(5)ALT684
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Petitioner filed O.S. No. 1776 of 2001, against the respondents, in the Court of IV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad, for specific performance of an agreement, dated 15-1-2001. The trial of the suit commenced. Along with an affidavit, in lieu of chief-examination, the petitioner filed the agreement, dated 15-1-2001. On entertaining a doubt, as to its admissibility, on account of its not being properly stamped, the petitioner filed I.A. No. 681 of 2002, under Section 151 C.P.C., requesting the court to record a finding, as to the admissibility of that document, with reference to the sufficiency of stamp duty. Respondents 11 and 12 contested the matter. The trial Court passed a reasoned order dated 26-2-2003, in that I. A., directing that the document is marked as Ex.A-1, subject to the objection as to the stamp duty. The Chief Ministerial Officer (CMO) of that court, was directed to assess the stamp duty and penalty payable on the document. ...
B.K. Agarwal Vs. Smt. S. Meenakshi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD391; 2005(5)ALT698
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The unsuccessful tenant in R.C. No. 691/95 on the file of I Addl. Rent Controller, Hyderabad and R.A. No. 114/2000 on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, had preferred the present C.R.P. under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (in short hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). The respondent herein-the landlady filed eviction petition on the ground of bona fide personal requirement and also tenant securing alternative accommodation. The learned Rent Controller ordered eviction on the ground of bona fide personal requirement but however negatived the ground of securing alternative accommodation. Aggrieved by the same, the tenant preferred R.A. No. 114/2000 on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, wherein the same was confirmed. Aggrieved by the same, the present C.R.P. is preferred.2. Sri Prakash Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel representing the tenant ma...
Renuka Nair Vs. G. Satish
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD234
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The instant revision petition is directed against the order, dated 29-7-2005, passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad, in LA. No. 495 of 2005 in O.P. No. 280 of 2005.2. The revision petitioner is the petitioner, who filed O.P. No. 280 of 2005 for dissolution of her marriage with the respondent-husband on the ground of cruelty and also sought for custody of minor son under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act. While the O.P. No. 280 of 2005 pending adjudication, she filed concomitant petition in LA. No. 495 of 2005 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking temporary injunction restraining the respondent from removing the minor from her custody pending disposal of the main petition. Initially, an ad-interim injunction was granted in favour of the petitioner, after having heard either side. When that application sought to be resisted by the husband, eventually under the impugned order the learned ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »