Andhra Pradesh Court October 2010 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.
The P.Rayavaram P.A.C. Society Ltd., P.Rayavaram Vs. Karneedi Satyanar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-21-2010
ORDER: The petitioner is P.Rayavaram Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society Limited, P.Rayavaram. The first respondent was engaged by it on daily wages initially on 20.11.1998. Thereafter, he was being paid monthly salary of Rs.1,500/- with effect from 25.10.1999. It is stated that the officials of the co-operative department in the district found fault with the appointment of the first respondent and other similar employees on the ground that the appointment was not regular and that it is contrary to the provisions of Section 116-C of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, mentioning this and other reasons. The then Person In-charge of the petitioner passed an order dated 24.01.2003 terminating the services of the petitioner. A sum of Rs.8,270/- was paid towards one month's salary in lieu of notice and compensation at the rate of salary for 15 days for each year of service as per Section 47 of the Andhra Pradesh Shops & Establishments Act, 1988 (for short - 'the Shop...
B.Shasidhar Vs. Bharat Dynamics Limited and Another.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-21-2010
ORDER: The petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Technical Assistant on 12.02.1992 in Bharat Dynamics Limited (A Government of Indian Enterprise), Ministry of Defence, respondent No.1 herein. Thereafter, he was promoted as Technical Assistant in the year 1995. He submitted resignation on 05.06.2002 and the same was accepted by the competent authority on 27.07.2002. The petitioner made a representation, dated 09.01.2003, to the Managing Director with a prayer to permit him to withdraw his resignation. Quite good amount of correspondence as well as discussion with the participation of union leaders appears to have taken place. Ultimately, through order, dated 02.12.2004, the Managing Director appointed the petitioner as Technical Assistant afresh. The petitioner joined the duty on 07.12.2004. A charge sheet, dated 22.02.2007, was served upon the petitioner alleging acts of misconduct and misrepresentation on his part. This was followed by a show cause notice, dated 26.08.2008, pro...
Kanumuri Suryakanthamma and Others. Vs. M. Narasimha Rao and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-21-2010
: The claimants in O.P.No.82 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (I Additional District Judge), Eluru (for short, "the Tribunal") filed this civil miscellaneous appeal feeling dissatisfied with award dated 04.03.2003, whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.4,18,950/- under various heads towards compensation for the death of one Kanumuri China Krishnamraju (for short, "the deceased"), the son of appellant No.1, husband of appellant No.2 and father of appellant Nos.3 and 4 respectively. Though notices have been served, no one appeared for the respondents. The Tribunal found that the accident has occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1, the driver of the Tractor owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3. The deceased was working as a Gas man, which is an aided post, in an aided college by name Dr.K.S. Raju Arts and Science College, Penugonda. An employee of the college was examined as PW.1 on behalf of the claimants. H...
Ramesh Kumar Gupta Vs. the State, Rep. by Its Public Prosecutor
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-21-2010
ORDER: This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is filed to quash the proceedings in Sessions Case No.36 of 2006 on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge, Sompeta, Srikakulam District, in which the petitioner is arrayed as A1 for the offence punishable under Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Explosives Substances Act, 1908 (for short, "the Act"). Facts, which give rise to filing of this petition, are that the petitioner is one of the directors of a Granite leasing company viz., M/s.Gallop Granites Private Limited. The said company was granted lease in the year 1997 in respect of the land to an extent of 15 hectares in survey No.1 of Addukonda Village, Tekkali Mandal, Srikakulam District, for the purpose of mining operations. When the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Enforcement, and his staff visited M/s.Gallop Granites Ltd., Melisathiwadsa on 17.11.2000, he found no records at the site except one person K.V.Ramaiah and that A2 was coming with a plastic bag containing explosive sub...
The Regional Director, Regional Office Vs. M/S Vmc Film Distributors R ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2010
: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order dated 02.05.2008 passed in I.A.No. 120 of 2007 in EIC.No. 09 of 2007 on the file of Employees Insurance Court and Chairman Industrial Tribunal-I, Hyderabad. I.A. No. 120 of 2007 was filed by the respondent herein viz., M/s VMC Film Distributors represented by its Proprietor Sri V. Doraiswami Raju, under Section 151 CPC read with Section 75 of Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short "the ESI Act") to direct the respondents therein in specific terms to lift the Attachment Order of movable property and to restore the possession of the same to it. That application was allowed in part with the following observation: "After hearing both sides, I am of the opinion that the petitioner prima facie is able to show that the attachment was made in a hurried manner without any reasonable cause. Hence, I am inclined to order interim custody of the attached movable properties to the petitioner. In the result, the petition is part...
D. Venkata Ramana, Hyderabad Vs. A.P.State Road Transport Corporation,
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2010
: The petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) on 31-12-1976 in the A.P.S.R.T.C (for short 'the Corporation'). He was promoted as Deputy Executive Engineer on 24-03-1984 and as Executive Engineer, on 08-01-1999. In the provisional list of Executive Engineers published on 31-03-2006, the petitioner figures at Sl.No.7. The 3rd respondent has also joined the service of the Corporation and he too was promoted as Executive Engineer, but, after the promotion of the petitioner, to that post. He figured at Sl.No.8 in the provisional seniority list. The next higher post is, "Chief Civil Engineer" (CCE). The Corporation considered the cases of the petitioner, the 3rd respondent and one, K. Suryanarayana, for promotion to the post of C.C.E. The 3rd respondent was promoted through orders dated 29-06-2009. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the same. The petitioner contends that, according to the A.P.S.R.T.C. Recruitment Regulations - 2004 (for short 'the Recruitment Regulation...
M/S. Emaar Hills Township Private Limited Vs. Government of Ap, Rep. b ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2010
Order: The petitioner, namely M/s. Emaar Hills Township Private Limited, represented by its authorized representative, has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to grant the following relief: This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction, more particularly in the nature of writ of certiorari calling for records of the proceedings in C.C. SR No. 1753 of 2010 on the file of Court of Principal Special Judge for S.P.E. and A.C.B Cases, Hyderabad, including the order dated 7th September, 2010 in the said C.C. SR No. 1753 of 2010 and after perusing the same, be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C. SR No. 1753 of 2010 on the file Court of Principal Special Judge for S.P.E. and A.C.B Cases, Hyderabad, including the order dated 7th September, 2010 in the said C.C. SR No. 1753 of 2010 and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. The peti...
Gurram Allabaksh and Others Vs. Shaik Habeebullabasha and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2010
ORDER: The respondents filed O.S.No.15 of 2008 against the petitioners in the Court of V Additional District Judge, Rayachoty, for the relief of declaration to the effect that the 1st respondent is the absolute owner of item No.1 and respondents 2 to 10 are the owners of item No.2 of the suit schedule property. Relief of perpetual injunction is also prayed for. The trial of the suit commenced and it is said to be at the stage of arguments. The petitioners filed I.A.No.358 of 2010 under Rule 17 of Order XVI C.P.C., with a prayer to permit them to amend the common written statement. They wanted to incorporate the plea as to the maintainability of the suit, on the ground of mis-joinder of causes of action, and to make a counter-claim. The respondents opposed the application. The trial Court dismissed the I.A., through order, dated 06.07.2010. Hence, this revision. Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the causes of action for respondent No.1, on the one ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gurukul Ghatkeswar Trust
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2010
ORDER: The questions, referred for our opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, are:- "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee-trust is entitled for exemption u/s.10(22) of the I.T. Act? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee-trust had not violated the provisions of Sections 11 & 13 of the I.T. Act in investing a portion of its funds in M/s. B.K. Industries, Nizamabad and with Smt.Janakidevi, one of the trustees and widow of the founder of the trust?" The assessee - M/s Gurukul Ghatkeswar Trust, hitherto ran an educational institution at Ghatkesar in the outskirts of Hyderabad. In response to the notices, issued under Section 148 of the Act, it filed nil returns claiming that its income was exempt from tax under Section 10(22) of the Act. The assessing officer rejected the assessee's claim, for the assessment year...
B.Mani, Chittoor District. Vs. the Government of Andhra Pradesh,
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2010
ORDER: The petitioner herein claims to be landless poor person. It is stated that his father by name Bangaraiah @ Bangarugan was assigned Ac.1.00 cents of land situated in Sy.No.1451/5 and Ac.0.25 cents in Sy.No.1441/10 totaling Ac.1.25 cents in Vinobhanagar Village, Satyavedu Taluk, Nagulapuram Mandal vide DKT patta No.37/4/1383 dated 22.07.1972. It is stated that the petitioner's father made the said land fit for cultivation and continued in possession till his death and thereafter the petitioner continued in possession and enjoyment of the same. Alleging that the 3rd respondent herein had encroached upon the land in question highhandedly and obtained pattadar pass book and title deed in her favour, the petitioner made a complaint dated 03.12.2008 before the 2nd respondent herein requesting for restoration of the land. As the 2nd respondent failed to take any action, the petitioner made a detailed representation dated 20.03.2010 before the District Collector, Chittoor. Having consid...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »