Andhra Pradesh Court June 2006 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.
Lokara Om Kumar Vs. Baikan Satyanarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2006
Reported in: AIR2007AP3; 2006(5)ALD91; 2007(3)ALT647
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. This is a civil revision petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India. It is filed by the defendant in O.S. No. 2053 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad. The suit is filed for injunction simpliciter by the respondents herein. Along with the written statement, it appears, the petitioner filed a sale deed dated 24-5-1995. The same was however not marked as an exhibit in the evidence. The petitioner, therefore, filed an application being I.A. No. 387 of 2006 under Order XIII Rule 7(2) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(CPC). He prayed for return of the sale deed and certified copy of the General Power of Attorney dated 24-6-1991. He stated in the affidavit accompanying the said application that he requires the documents to avail bank loan. This application was opposed. Taking a view that unless and until the suit is disposed of, the request of the petitioner for return of the d...
K.S. Liu and anr. Vs. A.P. Co-op. Tribunal Rep. by Its Registrar and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2006
Reported in: 2008(1)ALT382
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. The only controversy involved in this writ petition is whether an appeal under Section 76 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, (for short 'the Act'), is maintainable before the A.P. Co-operative Tribunal, Hyderabad, against an order passed by the Primary Authority (Co-operative Sub-Registrar/Sale Officer) under Section 70 of the Act.2. Though the attention of the Tribunal was drawn to Section 76 of the Act, instead of entertaining the appeal filed against the order in Claim Petition No. 2 of 2004 in E.P. No. 98/ 94A before the Primary Authority, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal holding that it is not maintainable in view of Sub-rule (21)(c) of Rule 52 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules and the only remedy available to the petitioners is to file a civil suit and work out their remedies.3. Before the Act was amended there was no tribunal constituted in the State of Andhra Pradesh. After amendment of the Act, Tribunal was constituted and Section 76 w...
ShamshuddIn and anr. Vs. Atta AnaruddIn and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2006
Reported in: I(2007)ACC330; 2006(5)ALD50; 2006(6)ALT147
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Appellant filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-from respondents alleging that their son-Ayub Basha (the deceased), aged 24 years earning Rs. 1,600/- p.m., a van driver, died as a result of an accident, as the van being driven by him was dashed against by a lorry belonging to 1st respondent and insured with 2nd respondent, due to the rash and negligent driving of its driver.2. 1st respondent chose to remain ex parte both in the Tribunal and in this Court.3. 2nd respondent filed its counter putting the appellants to proof of the averments in the petition.4. In support of their case, 1st appellant examined himself as P.W.I and Anr. witness as P.W. 2 and marked Exs-Al to A4. No evidence either oral or documentary adduced on behalf of 2nd respondent.5. Holding that the accident occurred due to 50% negligence of the deceased and 50% negligence of the driver of the lorry, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 40,000/- as compensation to the appellants. Di...
D. Venkata Lakshmamma and ors. Vs. M.P. Subbarayudu and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALD271
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The claimants in O.P. No. 269 of 1998 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Anantapur, filed this civil miscellaneous appeal, aggrieved by the order, dated 31-3-2004, dismissing their claim.2. One Sri D. Venkata Naidu, the husband of first appellant and father of appellants 2 and 3, were travelling in an auto rickshaw bearing No. AP-12/790 on 20-11-1992 from R.S. Puram to Gooty. The auto was hit by a Tractor with Trailor bearing Nos. ATA 9304 and 9305. The Tractor was owned by the first respondent and was insured with the second respondent. In the accident, Mr. D. Venkata Naidu is said to have received multiple injuries and that he has undergone treatment at various hospitals at Gooty, Ananthapur and Bangalore. He ultimately, died on 6-12-1993. The O.P, was presented in 1998. A sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- was claimed as compensation. It was pleaded that for the prolonged treatment of Mr. D. Venkata Naidu over a per...
Tatineni Meena Vs. Shaik Mansoor Ali and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ520; 2006(5)ALD368; 2006(6)ALT34
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded to her, one of the claimants in a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) preferred this appeal.2. The case, in brief, of the claimants is that Paturi Raghuram (hereinafter referred to as the deceased), aged about 29 years and drawing Rs. 3,127-61ps per month as salary as Sub-Editor in Andhra , Printers Limited, while proceeding on his scooter died in an accident caused due to the rash and negligent driving by the first respondent of the lorry belonging to the second respondent and insured with the third respondent, and so they are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/-. The case of the first respondent is that the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the scooter by the deceased, and that he was not driving the lorry on that day and that the police foisted a criminal case against him in connection with the accident. Second respondent chose to remain...
Kyathur Chakali Chinnakka Vs. Noorjahan Begum
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALD498
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Defendant in a suit for declaration of title and possession preferred this appeal. For the sake of convenience parties to the appeal would hereinafter be referred to as they are arrayed in the trial Court.2. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that she purchased the plaint schedule property from Kyrunnisa Begum under a registered sale deed dated 17-12-1979 for Rs. 20,000/- and as the defendant, who was a tenant of her vendor in respect of the plaint schedule property, attorned to her and had failed to pay the rents due, she filed O.S. No. 482 of 1980 for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property from the defendant, in which the defendant took a plea that she is in possession of the plaint schedule property in pursuance of an agreement of sale in her favour executed by Kyrunnisa Begum and her husband and so she cannot be evicted therefrom that too in a suit where the declaration of the title to the plaint schedule property is not sought and the Cou...
K. Bala Krishna Vs. Debts Recovery Tribunal and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALT695; I(2008)BC447; [2007]78SCL118(AP)
ORDERG.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. This is a petition for quashing order dated 07-10-2005. passed by Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench (for short 'the Tribunal;) in S.A. No. 14 of 2004 and also the sale conducted by State Bank of India (for short 'the Bank') for realization of its dues.2. In the affidavit filed by him, the petitioner has averred that he purchased semi-finished flat No. 307, Prameela Towers, Kakaguda, Secunderabad from M/s. Siri Constructions vide registered sale deed dated 25-09-2000. For the purpose of purchasing the flat, he applied to the Bank for sanction of a term loan of Rs. 6,00,000/-, which was duly sanctioned. It has been further averred that even though the terms of agreement entered with the builder postulated disbursement of loan by the Bank in instalments subject to the stage-wise completion of construction work, the Bank authorities released the entire loan amount ignoring the fact that the builder had not taken steps to complete the construction work. Stil...
Depot Manager, Apsrtc, and ors. Vs. D. Vykuntarao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-16-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD693; 2006(4)ALT668
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. This appeal by the Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the Corporation), Parvathipuram, Vizainagaram and three others is directed against order dated 31-12-2004 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 5959 of 1997, whereby he set aside award dated 25-09-1995 passed by the Chairman and Presiding Officer of Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam (hereinafter described as 'the Tribunal') in I.D. No. 135 of 1993 as also the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority on respondent No. 1-D. Vykunta Rao (hereinafter described as 'the workman') and directed his reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages along with other benefits.The Facts:2. The workman joined service of the Corporation as driver on 13-03-1981. While he was on duty on 30-11-1991, vehicle No. AE21112 driven by him was involved in an accident at Chinabogili, which resulted in the death of a lady pedestrian. On receipt of t...
P.L. Ganapathi Rao and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-16-2006
Reported in: (2006)206CTR(AP)242; [2006]285ITR501(AP)
Bilal Nazki, J.1. This is a reference made at the instance of the assessee. The facts leading to the reference are that the assessee-firm carried on business in distribution of feature films. It had acquired rights over a film called 'Paramanandayya Sishvula Kama' during the year 1974 from its producers M/s. Sri Devi Productions, Tanuku. During the year under consideration the assessee sold the leasehold rights in respect of the said film to M/s. Poorna Financiers and as per the agreement dated December 1, 1984, the consideration was Rs. 4,00,000. This amount had to be paid immediately on execution of the agreement. The agreement stated that the said amount of Rs. 4,00,000 shall be adjusted in five years i.e., Rs. 1,00,000 in the first year. Rs. 90,000 in the second year, Rs. 80,000 in the third year, Rs. 70,000 in the fourth year and Rs. 60,000 in the fifth year. The entire amount of Rs. 4,00,000 had been paid to the assessee in the year under consideration but the assessee had shown ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bakelite Hylam Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-16-2006
Reported in: 207(2007)CCR584; [2006]287ITR75(AP)
Bilal Nazki, J.1. The question referred in this reference is:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that interest and other income aggregating to Rs. 451.4 lakhs was includible under the head 'Profits and gains of business' and were to be taken into consideration for computing deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. The Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the assessee and held that the interest and other income aggregating to Rs. 451.4 lakhs was includible under the head 'Profits and gains of business' and was to be taken into consideration for computing deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Revenue objected to the order of the Tribunal and reference was accordingly made.3. Admittedly the income was sought to be included under the head 'Profits and gains of business' and computed in terms of Section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). Section 80HHC of the Act lays d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »