Andhra Pradesh Court January 2012 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 Commissioner of Income Tax Visakhapa Vs. M/S.Artos Breweries Ltd., ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
COMMON JUDGMENT : (PER HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI Madan B. Lokur) 1. In these two appeals as well as referred case the following substantial question of law has arisen for consideration: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the royalty paid by the assessee-company to M/s.Mohan Meakins Breweries was in the nature of revenue expenditure?" 2. The assessee was in the business of manufacture and sale of beer. The assessee used to manufacture beer under the name and style of "Golden Eagle", which is the popular brand name of M/s. Mohan Meakins Breweries Limited., Solan, U.P. (for short 'MMB'). 3. The assessee entered into a Technical Assistance Agreement dated 7.2.1979 with MMB. Some of the clauses of the Agreement are as follows: "i) MMB (Mohan Meakins Breweries) grants, for the term of the agreement, an exclusive licence to Artos to use the know-how supplied by MMB for the manufacture of the products at the plant and for this g...
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhap Vs. V. Subbaraju, Proprietor ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.34573 o03. 01.2012 G.Durga Prasad The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Reptd by Its Principal Secretary, Social Welfare (CV.I) Department, Hyderabad and two others Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P.Rambhoopal Reddy Counsel for the Respondents: GP for Social Welfare ?CITATIONS:2011. 5) Alt 443 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside G.O.Ms.No.67, dated 02.12.2011, whereby respondent No.1 has confirmed order, dated 07.10.2000 of respondent No.2, cancelling the petitioner's Caste certificate, dated 09.02.1990, issued by respondent No.3. The petitioner was appointed as Police Constable on the strength of the Caste certificate issued in his favour by respondent No.3 as belonging to Madiga (SC) community. When complaints were received that he belongs to Golla caste, which is a backward caste, respondent No.2 has referred the complaints to the District Level Scrutiny Committee, Ananthapur (for short 'the Committee')....
Shriram Life Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. Simharaju Swapna
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
(Typed to the dictation of Smt. M. Shreesha Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.151/2009 on the file of District Forum, Karimnagar the opposite parties preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainants husband took a Sriraksha policy from opposite party No.1 for Rs.1,00,000/- which was issued after thorough medical check up. As per the terms of the policy in the event of death of the policy holder, the nominee is entitled for double sum assured with bonus and other benefits. The deceased policy holder died on 5-1-2009 due to severe chest pain at his house. The complainant informed opposite party No.1 about the death of the policy holder and submitted the claim forms along with necessary documents and requested for settlement of the claim. Inspite of repeated demands as the claim was not settled, she got issued a legal notice on 25-7-2009 for which opposite party No.2 replied stating that the claim was not settled for want of releva...
Pachigulla Swarooparani Vs. Bobbilli Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd. and O ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
Oral Order : (As per R.Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) 1. The appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum whereby the complaint was dismissed as not maintainable in view of the award passed by the Registrar and the complaint was held to be filed to obstruct the execution proceedings of the award passed by the registrar. 2. The facts of the case are that on 16-02-2001 appellants husband borrowed an amount of `6,00,000/- from the first respondent bank by depositing the title deeds. Again on 17-11-2001 the appellants husband borrowed an amount of `15,00,000/- from the first respondent bank. 3. The version of the appellant is that she availed the loan an amount of `5,00,000/- and the fifth respondent availed the loan of `15,00,000/- in the name of the appellant. The appellant would seek for direction against the first respondent bank to proceed against the fifth respondent for recovery of the amount of `15,00,000/-. 4. The fourth respondent resisted the claim on the premise tha...
Shriram Chits Private Limited Vs. Smt. Anathoju Mahalaxmi
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
Oral Order (Per Honble Justice Sri D.Appa Rao, President) Heard both sides. This revision petition is preferred by the opposite party against the direction of the District Forum to send the documents to hand writing expert, Forensic Science Laboratory to compare the disputed signature dated 21-11-2002 with that of the admitted signatures. During the course of enquiry, the complainant filed an application U/s.45 of Indian Evidence Act to refer the document dated 21-11-2002 alleged to have been executed by him to Hand writing expert on the ground that it was forged. On the said application, the District Forum directed the disputed signatures of the complainant along with the admitted signatures found in the complaint, petition and vakalathnama to be sent to comparison to handwriting expert, Forensic Science Laboratory. The opposite party, i.e. the revision petitioner, preferred this revision stating that those documents were executed subsequent to the agreement dated 21-11-2002 and reque...
Dr. Annapareddy Lakshmi Vs. J. Suneetha and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
Oral Order : (As per R.Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) 1. The first opposite party in the complaint has filed the appeal. The first respondent has filed complaint seeking damages of `2,70,000/- and compensation to the extent of `2,30,000/-against the appellant and the second respondent alleging medical negligence. 2. The facts of the case as per the version of the first respondent are that after undergoing periodical check up by the appellant, she was admitted on 2-08-2007 to the appellants nursing home for delivery. A female child was born at 3.45 p.m. on the same day. The appellant informed the first respondent that conducting cesarean section upon her is necessary as she had delivered her first child through cesarean section. The appellant assured the first respondent that every thing will be fine. The second respondent confirmed the blood group of the first respondent as O-ve After undergoing the operation, the first respondent developed abdominal pain and abdominal distension for thr...
The Commissioner of Income Tax, A.P.-i,h Vs. M/S. Ajay Automation (P) ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2012
Madan B. Lokur, J.This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') has been admitted on the following two substantial questions of law:-1. "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that development of software amounts to manufacture of an article or goods and the export of such goods secure the benefit of deduction to the assessee u/s.80HHC of the I.T. Act ?2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in not holding that insertion of Sec. 80HHE of the I.T. Act w.e.f. 1.4.1991 providing for grant of deduction on software development only w.e.f. 1.4.1991 militates against grant of such deduction u/s.80HHC for the anterior period ?"3. The assessee carries on the business of developing computer software. For the relevant assessment year 1989-90, it claimed a deduction to the extent of Rs.21.55 crores under Section 80HHC of the Act.4. The assessing officer accepted the claim made by the assessee, but the Commissioner of Income Tax, exercising...
State Rep. by Central Bureau of Investig Vs. Smt.Y.Srilakshmi Wife of ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2012
N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J.1. This is an application filed under Section 439(2) read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 to cancel the bail granted to the respondent herein who while working as a Secretary to the Industries and Commerce Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad is said to have been involved in criminal conspiracy and the other offences in granting lease to Gali Janardhana Reddy and another and the case being popularly known as Obulapuram Mining Company Case(O.M.C.). A crime in RC.No.17(A)/2009 was registered on 07-12-2009 against which O.M.C has gone in Writ and obtained stay of the proceedings and ultimately the stay was vacated on 16-12-2010 and thereafter the investigation was taken up by the C.BI and in the course of investigation the accused Gali Janardhana Reddy and another were arrested on 05-11-2011 and additional offences under Sections 409 and 468 IPC were added. After interrogating the respondent herein, she was arrested on 28-11-20...
Alaparthi Chinna Vs. Kota Lakshmi Satyanarayana and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2012
SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J.ORDER :1) The petitioner/defacto-complainant filed this petition under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C for cancelling bail granted to the 1st respondent/accused in Crl.P.No.7709 of 2011 on 06.09.2011 by this Court in Crime No.73/2011 of I Town Police station, Tenali, Guntur District on the ground that by the time order of bail was passed by this Court, the accused was not arrested and remanded to judicial custody and that by misrepresentation of facts, the 1st respondent/accused obtained bail in this crime from this Court.2) The 1st respondent/accused is accused of offences punishable under Sections 420, 323, 506, 509 I.P.C and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It is alleged that the accused obtained Rs.30,000/- from the defacto-complainant for securing job as Aaya to her on daily wages and that he failed to secure the job and that when the defacto-complainant demanded for return of the said amount, the a...
N.Uligappa (Minor), Represened by His Father- Vs. the Chairman and Man ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2012
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J.ORDER:1. This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.8 lakhs to the petitioner towards compensation for loss of his left leg and right hand.2. I have heard Sri G.Sanyasi Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.3. The petitioner, who is a minor, represented by his father and natural guardian, is unfortunate to have lost his left leg and right hand due to electrocution on 04.12.2010. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner sought for payment of compensation alleging negligence on the part of the respondents in maintaining 33 KV over head lines.4. In para 5 of the affidavit, filed in support of the Writ Petition, it is averred as under: -"I submit that the Additional Assistant Engineer, Rural, Alur, after knowing the accident, immediately rushed to the accident spot along with Line Inspector/Halaharvi and inspected the spot. And he immediately, addressed a letter No.AE/R/ALR/F Doc/D.No.39/1, dated 28.0...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »