Andhra Pradesh Court December 2007 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.
Annagani Yedukondalu Vs. Rameshwara Swamy Vari Devasthanam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD288
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. WVMP No. 1791 of 2007 is filed to vacate the interim order dated 5.6.2007 made in WPMP No. 14125 of 2007 in WP. No. 11328 of 2007,.2. At the request of the Counsel on record, the writ petition is being disposed of finally.3. Sri M. Vidyasagar, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner had taken this Court through the contents of the affidavit and would submit that in the facts and circumstances of the case, relief prayed for in the writ petition to be granted.4. On the contrary, Sri V.T.M. Prasad, learned Standing Counsel representing respondents had taken this Court through the contents in the counter-affidavit and would submit that in the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.5. Heard the Counsel and perused the records produced before the Court.6. The writ petition is filed for a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned notice issued by the Manager of the subject temple dated 23.5.2007 contempl...
S. Mahaboob Sharif Vs. Jareena Banu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2007
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD519; 2008(5)ALT162
Bilal Nazki, A.C.J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Earlier, we had directed that the boy and the girl, who are petitioners in the writ petition, be present in person in this Court. Today they appeared. The boy i.e., writ petitioner No. 2 contended that he was married to the girl, who is writ petitioner No. 1 and therefore he wanted to take the custody of petitioner No. 1. Originally, the writ petition had been filed for the purpose of quashing Crime No. 137 of 2007 of II Town Police Station, Proddutur, Kadapa District, which was registered against writ petitioner No. 2. Without passing order in that writ petition, an order came to be passed by the learned Single Judge on 27th of November 2007 directing that the girl shall be lodged in a Home run by the Women and Child Welfare Department. This order is challenged by the father of the girl. Today, we examined the girl in the open Court, in which, she stated that she wants to go with her parents. Then the learned Counsel for w...
V.V. Projects and Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: (2008)216CTR(AP)196; [2008]300ITR40(AP)
T. Meena Kumari, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, Bench 'B' in I.T.A. No. 865/Hyd/2002, dated 29.10.2004, the assessee preferred this Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act').2. The facts, in brief, are as under:The Appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the Assessee Company') is engaged in the business of manufacture of chemicals and also running a hotel in Kurnool Town. The Assessee Company filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 1995-96 on 30.11.1995 disclosing 'Nil' income. The return was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act on 30.8.1996. It is to be noted that in its return dated 30.11.1995 the assessee company claimed 50% depreciation on Rs. 44,42,129/- on the Solar Equipment acquired by it for its hotel project. While stating that the solar equipment was acquired and installed after September, 1994, the Assessee Company claimed 50% depreciation amounting to Rs. 22,21,065/- for the...
Yelati Rambabu and ors. Vs. Govt. of A.P. Rep. by Its Secretary, Indus ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD483; 2008(2)ALT493
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In these four writ petitions, the notifications issued under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act'), on different dates, proposing to acquire the lands of the respective petitioners, are challenged. The said notifications were issued for acquisition of lands, for the benefit of A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (for short 'the Corporation').2. The petitioners state that they are the owners and possessors of the land and doing agriculture, thereon. They contend that the agriculture is the only source of their livelihood, and their lands were chosen for acquisition, with a view to help certain industrialists. Apart from pleading hardship on account of the proposed acquisition, the petitioners plead that the notifications were issued by an authority, not vested with the power, under the Act. It is stated that though the Act provides for publication of notifications, either by the Government, or by the District Collector...
K. Ganna Reddy Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD178; 2008(4)ALT340
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The petitioner, K. Ganna Reddy, filed the present writ petition praying for issuance of writ of certiorari to call for records pertaining to G.O. Rt. No. 1284, dated 8.10.2007, issued by the first respondent, to set aside the same and pass such other suitable orders.2. Though it is specified as 8.10.2007 in the relief prayed for in the writ petition, G.O. Rt. No. 1284 appears to be dated 6.10.2007, by Agriculture and Co-operation (Agrl.Mktg.I) Department. The impugned order had referred to allegations 1, 2, 3 and 17 and the said allegations are hereunder:Allegation No. 1: It was alleged in the petition that (15) licensees were suspended and revoked.Allegation No. 2. The allegation is that during the month of April, 2006, one licensee Sri Oruganti Rama Murthy and Bonagiri Venkateshwarlu, Commission Agents were suspended and were revoked within (10) days without the Resolution of the Market Committee for having excessively Weighed Red gram in their Adthis.Allegat...
B.C. Sanjeeva Reddy Vs. Assistant Director of Mines and Geology and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD281
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Vedula Venkataramana, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Industries representing respondents.2. This Court issued Rule Nisi on 14.7.2007 and in WPMP No. 22008 of 2007, passed the following order:Notice. Pending further orders, there shall be stay of forfeiture of bid amount pursuant to the impugned order dated 1.8.2007.3. WVMP No. 2441 of 2007 is filed to vacate the interim order.4. Sri Vedula Venkataramana, learned Counsel for the writ petitioner, had taken this Court through the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and would maintain that since the details were not furnished and under those circumstances, the writ petitioner had approached this Court and obtained an interim order. Learned Counsel would also submit that inasmuch as necessary details had been furnished in the counter-affidavit, at present, the writ petitioner is inclined to comply with the same.5. Learned Gove...
Koppu Satyanarayana Vs. Cantonment Board
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD443
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Hari Haran, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner and Sri Deepak Bhattacharjee, the learned Counsel representing the respondent/Cantonment Board.2. Sri Hari Haran, the learned Counsel, had taken this Court through the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and also the stand taken in the counter-affidavit. The learned Counsel also would submit that at a particular point of time, approval had been granted and objection had not been taken. But f8f certain reasons, the petitioner was unable to proceed with the construction and again when an application has been made praying for the building permission, the present objection had been taken. The learned Counsel also would submit that as far as the other similar plots are concerned, in most of the plots constructions came up since permissions had been granted and the writ petitioner is being discriminated. The Counsel also would maintain that at any rate the objection...
S. Ravi Kanth and anr. Vs. A.P. Mahesh Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd. an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALT225
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri K.V. Simhadri and Smt. Vedavani, the Counsel representing the writ petitioners in these Writ Petitions and also Sri Ravi Kondaveeti and Sri Y. Ramatheertha, Counsel representing the respondents.2. W.P. No. 6846/2007 is filed by one S. Ravi Kanth, praying for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the A.P. Mahesh Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd., in filing the Crl. M.P. No. 954/2002 under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience) before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad without first issuing the mandatory notice Under Section 13(4) of the Act is arbitrary, illegal and violative of the Act and also violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the Order of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate passed in Crl. M.P. No. 954/2002, dt. 16-3-2007 appointing an Advocate Commiss...
Sri Sai Agritech Vs. Commissioner of Agriculture and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD366
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court ordered notice before admission on 12.10.2007. Counter-affidavit is filed.2. M/s. Sri Sai Agritech, represented by its proprietor, filed the present writ petition for a writ of mandamus to declare the Proceedings No. SR Cell (1) 264/2007, dated 4.7.2007 of the second respondent and as confirmed by the first respondent in proceedings dated 18.8.2007, as being illegal, irregular, unreasonable, arbitrary exercise of powers in gross violation of principles of natural justice apart from being contrary to the provisions of the Seeds Act, 1966 (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Seeds Act') and the Seeds (Control) Order, 1983 (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Control Order') and consequently, set aside the same with a further direction to the respondents to restore the licence and renew the same and pass such other orders.3. Sri S. V. Bhatt, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner, had taken this Court through the affidavit and th...
Syed MomIn Fazul Mohammed Vs. the State of A.P. Rep. by the Public Pro ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-04-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD(Cri)374; 2008(1)ALT(Cri)214
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This appeal, under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is filed by appellant (A-1), in S.C. No. 18 of 2003 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, against the judgment of the trial Court dated 22-08- 2005.2. The appellant was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C., and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. AccusedNo. 2 in that case was acquitted.3. The case presented by the prosecution, before the trial Court, was as under:A-1 and A-2 are husband and wife, and the latter was working as Auxiliary Nurse and Mid-wife, at Amadaguru Government Hospital, in Anantapur District. As part of their duties, herself and PW-2, by name, Shaik Mohammad Shafi, who was working as Heath Assistant (Male), used to motivate the people to undergo family planning operation, and attend the persons who have undergone operation. In the pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »