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.
Commissioner of Income Tax, VijayawadA. Vs. M/S.O.R.Distilleries Ltd., ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA REFERRED CASE Nos.254 of 1996 and 77 o27. 01.2012 Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada. M/s.O.R.Distilleries Ltd., Tirupathi. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri J.V.Prasad, Standing Counsel for Income Tax. Counsel for respondent : Sri A.V.Krishna Koundinya Citations:1. (1989) 2 SCC 45.: (1989) 75 STC 7.(SC) : AIR 198.SC 101.2. (2010) 328 ITR 2.(Delhi) 3. (1979) 2 SCC 3.= AIR 197.SC 19.4. AIR 198.SC 188.5. (2001) 7 SCC 35.6. (2002) 7 SCC 27.= AIR 200.SC 324.7. (2007) 6 SCC 14.8. (2003) 11 SCC 14.9. (2007) 11 SCC 12.10. (2008) 11 SCC 57.11. (1989) 3 SCC 70.: AIR 199.SC 12.12. (2005) 4 SCC 53.: AIR 200.SC 262.13. AIR 196.SC 61.14. AIR 200.SC 128.: (2001) 4 SCC 28.15. AIR 197.SC 65.(1978) 4 SCC 1.16. (2009) 311 ITR 34.(P&H) COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) These two Referred Cases can be disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the assessment of income tax of the same assessee, namely...
Commissioner of Income Tax, VijayawadA. Vs. M/S.O.R.Distilleriesltd., ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA REFERRED CASE Nos.254 of 1996 and 77 o27. 01.2012 Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada. M/s.O.R.Distilleries Ltd., Tirupathi. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri J.V.Prasad, Standing Counsel for Income Tax. Counsel for respondent : Sri A.V.Krishna Koundinya Citations:1. (1989) 2 SCC 45.: (1989) 75 STC 7.(SC) : AIR 198.SC 101.2. (2010) 328 ITR 2.(Delhi) 3. (1979) 2 SCC 3.= AIR 197.SC 19.4. AIR 198.SC 188.5. (2001) 7 SCC 35.6. (2002) 7 SCC 27.= AIR 200.SC 324.7. (2007) 6 SCC 14.8. (2003) 11 SCC 14.9. (2007) 11 SCC 12.10. (2008) 11 SCC 57.11. (1989) 3 SCC 70.: AIR 199.SC 12.12. (2005) 4 SCC 53.: AIR 200.SC 262.13. AIR 196.SC 61.14. AIR 200.SC 128.: (2001) 4 SCC 28.15. AIR 197.SC 65.(1978) 4 SCC 1.16. (2009) 311 ITR 34.(P&H) COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) These two Referred Cases can be disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the assessment of income tax of the same assessee, namely...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Rep. by Its Divisional Manager, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2012
Oral Order : (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The appeals arise from the orders passed in the complaints filed by the same complainant against the very same opposite party and the nature of the dispute in all the appeals is in regard to insurance claim with regard to death of birds in poultry farm. As such the appeals are taken up for disposal by a common order. F.A.no.1060 of 2010 is taken as the lead case. 2. The respondent is a partnership firm doing poultry business at Vemulapalli village in East Godavari District. The respondent firm insured the poultry birds under comprehensive insurance policy with the appellant insurance company for the period commencing from 29.09.1998 till 19.01.2000 covering the risk inclusive of mortality. The poultry farm consists of six to nine segments of cages with each segment consisting of six rows of cages in three tiers and again each tier consisting of two rows. Each cage accommodates 3 to 4 birds and each shed 14,000 to 17,000...
The New India Assurance Co.Ltd., Rep. by Its Divisional Manager Vs. Sr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2012
Oral Order : (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The appeal is filed by New India Assurance Company Ltd questioning the legality of the order directing it to pay an amount of `1,08,400/- with interest @ 9%p.a. and costs. 2. The respondent insured his Lorry bearing number AP.9U.8166. The appellant insurance company issued insurance policy bearing No. 610100/31/04/06699 for the period commencing from 24.07.2004 till 23.07.2005. The lorry met with an accident on 21.05.2005 when the driver of a Truck tried to overtake another Truck and the driver of the Lorry attempted to avoid collision with Motor Cycle, the Lorry turned turtle and the inmates sustained injuries as also the Lorry suffered damage.. The lorry sustained damage in the accident. The Police, Yenagam, Maharashtra, registered a case in crime number 70 of 2005 under sections 279,337,338,427, of the IPC 118,117,119,134-A and 177 of the M.V. Act. The respondent claimed a sum of `1, 46,511/. .The respondent addresse...
Md.Ameena and Another Vs. the Manager, State Bank of India and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2012
Oral Order: (As per Sri R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The complainants in C.D.No.42 of 2004 are the appellants. The first appellant is the wife and the second appellant is the son of Mohammad Azmal Hussain. Mohammad Azmal Hussains father has filed C.D.No.158 of 2003. Mohammad Azmal Hussain during his life time obtained life insurance policy bearing number 840612861 for sum assured of `1,00,000/- from the second respondent insurance company. At the time of obtaining the insurance policy, Mohammad Azmal Hussain issued cheque bearing number 00493505 dated 29.12.2001 for an amount of `3,412/- towards the premium, in favour of the second respondent insurance company. The second respondent insurance company accepted the proposal and issued insurance policy bearing number 840612861 for a sum assured of `1,00,000/- with the date of commencement of risk from 15.12.2001. The insured had appointed the first appellant as his nominee under Section 39 of the Insurance Act. 2. The second...
Kapu Anasuyamma,anantapur District Vs. K.Malla Reddy and 2 Others, Ana ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J.Order:1. The short issue that arise for consideration in this civil revision petition is whether the decision of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Rayadurg, Anantapur district, overruling the petitioner's objection for marking of unregistered partition deed dated 20-02-1994 suffers from any illegality.2. The petitioner filed O.S.No.43 of 2008 against the respondents for perpetual injunction. During the course of chief-examination of D.W.1, he sought to mark an unregistered partition deed dated 20-02-1994. The petitioner raised an objection for marking the said document on the ground that the same is unregistered and insufficiently stamped partition deed, which cannot be admitted in evidence unless it is registered on proper stamp duty. The Court below has admitted the document into evidence as Ex.B-1.3. The law is settled that an unregistered document which requires registration is admissible in evidence under Section 49 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, for co...
Jasti Purnachandra Rao and Another Vs. Jasti Leela Kumari and 3 ors
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J.Order:1. This civil revision petition arises out of the order dated 14-6-2011 in I.A.No.664 of 2011 in O.S.No.62 of 2009 on the file of the learned District Judge, Guntur.2. The petitioners are defendants 1 and 5 in O.S.No.62 of 2009 instituted by respondent No.1 for partition and allotment of her share in the suit schedule properties. The petitioners have filed I.A.No.664 of 2011 for summoning one Somavarapu Sambasiva Rao as a witness for the purpose of confirmation of original sale deed No.2970/1993. The said application having been dismissed by the Court below, the petitioners filed the present civil revision petition.3. In support of the order dismissing the petitioners' application, the Court below has assigned two reasons, namely, that the petitioners, who are parties to the sale deed in question, were supposed to have knowledge of execution of the sale deed and that they have not taken any steps to summon the said document and also one Somavarapu Sambasiva...
Ali Jaffar So. R.A. Mahmood Vs. V. Venkat Reddy So. Narsimha Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J.ORDER:1. The decree-holder in O.S.No.11/2006 filed this Civil Revision Petition assailing order dated 6-9-2011 in I.A.No.5/2011 in O.S.No.11/2006 on the file of the learned XI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad (for brevity "the lower Court").2. The facts, in nutshell, are that the petitioner filed the above mentioned suit for specific performance of agreement of sale against the respondent. After the respondent was set exparte, an exparte decree was passed by the lower court on 28-11-2006. One of the conditions stipulated therein was that the petitioner shall deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs.16,640/- into the Court within one month from the date of decree. The petitioner did not deposit the balance sale consideration as per the said condition. He has, however, filed I.A.No.5/2011 for condoning the delay of 1417 days and extension of time for deposit of balance sale consideration.3. In support of his application, the petitioner has av...
K. Ravi Kumar Reddy and anr Vs. Ms. I.C.D.S. Limited,represented by It ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J.ORDER:1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the judgment-debtors under the arbitration awards. The respondent, who succeeded in securing arbitration award in A.P.No.137/2001, filed E.P.No.18/2002 on the file of the learned District Judge, Anantapur, for arrest and detention of the petitioners in civil prison for non-payment of the decretal amount. The respondent has also filed E.P.Nos.19/2002 and 20/2002 in A.P.Nos.138/2001 and 136/2001, respectively. By Common Order dated 3-2-2011, the learned District Judge allowed E.P.No.18/2002 and ordered arrest of the petitioners. Assailing the said order, the petitioners filed the present Civil Revision Petition.2. At the hearing, Sri Vedula Venkataramana, learned Senior Counsel advanced two submissions, namely, (i) that mere possession of property by itself would not be enough for the decree-holder to seek arrest of the judgment-debtors and that unless malafide intention to evade payment of the decretal amount is p...
Ms. V.i.P. Emporium, Rep. by Its Propri Vs. Ms. Tci Finance Ltd., Secu ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
Order: 1. This civil revision petition arises out of the order dated 08-9-2011 in I.A.No.1483 of 2009 in O.S.No.2 of 1998 on the file of the learned I Additional District Judge, Guntur. 2. I have heard Sri N.Siva Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.Niranjan Reddy, learned counsel, instructed by Sri V.M.M.Chary, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. The petitioners are defendants in the suit filed by the respondent for recovery of certain amounts on the basis of mortgage. The suit was decreed in favour of the respondent. The respondent thereupon filed I.A.No.1483 of 2009 seeking permission to correct the boundaries of the plaint schedule and consequently to correct the boundaries of the decree schedule. Even though the petitioners have resisted the application by filing a counter affidavit, however, having regard to the nature of the corrections sought for by the respondent, the Court below has allowed the said application. Assailing the said order, the petitioners hav...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »