Andhra Pradesh Court October 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.
State Bank of Hyderabad Vs. the Tahsildar and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
Common Order: The subject-matter of these writ petitions is common. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to, as arrayed in W.P.No.27987 of 2012. All the three writ petitions are filed by the same petitioner. While in W.P.Nos.11101 and 11102 of 2012, two notices dated 02-04-2012 and 09-04-2012 issued by the Tahsildar, Dharmasagar Mandal, the 1st respondent herein, under Section 22 of the A.P. Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 (for short 'the Act') are challenged, W.P.No.29787 of 2012 is filed, challenging the notice dated 09-08-2012, issued under Section 36 of the Act. The petitioner advanced loans to two rice mills, viz., M/s Lakshminarasimha Industries, IDA, Rampur Village, Dharmasagar Mandal, and M/s Somanath Agro Industries, Ramanjapur, Venkatapur Mandal, Warangal District. It is stated that movable and immovable properties pertaining to the rice mills were hypothecated or mortgaged, as the case may be, as security,...
The New India Assurance Company Limited, Rep. by Its Branch Manager Vs ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
Aggrieved by the order in W.C. No.116 of 2004 dated 05-03-2005 passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour - III, Hyderabad, whereby and whereunder, the learned commissioner allowing the W.C. in part awarded a compensation of Rs.2,56,999/- to respondent Nos.1 and 2 - applicants under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, as against their claim of Rs.4,00,000/-, the appellant - the New India Assurance Company Limited preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 2. Appellant herein is insurer of the tractor bearing No.AP24 - V - 1760 belonging to respondent No.3 herein and they are Opposite Parties - II and I respectively before the learned Commissioner, and respondent Nos.1 and 2, who are the applicants, are parents of the deceased workman Banoth Amarsingh @ Ganesh, who died in the accident. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they arrayed before the learned Co...
Director-hr, Ushodaya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Secy to Govt., Sta ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
The petitioner, a company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Hyderabad filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus or one in the nature of mandamus for the following reliefs: a) declaring Notification G.O. Ms. No. 63, dated 02.08.2008 issued by the Principal Secretary to Government, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Labour, Employment, Training and Factories (Lab-I) Department, as being illegal and nonest and a nullity in law and being in excess of powers under Section 39 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; b) declaring Proceedings No. B/2930/2011, dated 16.05.2012 of the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Ranga Reddy Zone, Hyderabad, the respondent No.2 purportedly making a reference under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as clearly illegal, invalid and void; c) consequently restrain the learned respondent No.4 i.e., The Chairman-cum-Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I, Chandra Vihar Buildings, M.J.M...
Ajay Kumar Gupta Dochania Vs. M/S. Bhagyanagar Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd, a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
COMMON ORDER: C.P. No.67 of 2006 is filed by Sri Ajay Kumar Gupta Dochania, and C.P. No.104 of 2006 is filed by Amarnath Gupta Dochania and 6 others, seeking winding up of the respondent company under Section 433(f) read with Section 439(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 1956 (“the Act” for short). As the respondent company is common in both these company petitions, it would suffice if the pleadings in C.P. No.67 of 2006 are noted. Though several contentions are raised in the company petition, filed for winding up of the respondent company, Sri S. Ravi, Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, would restrict his submissions only to Section 433(c), and submit that it would suffice if this Court were to note the pleadings in support thereof. Both the petitioners herein are shareholders of the respondent company. While the petitioners claim that they, along with their family members, held 1/3rd of the share capital of the respondent-company, it is the case of t...
Boddu Yohan Vs. the Sub Inspector of Police and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
The petitioner, who is accused No. 1, in C.C. No. 107 of 2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chintalapudi, West Godavari District, has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to quash the said proceedings against him. Briefly stated the facts of the case are, on 22.11.2005, respondent No.2 filed a private complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chintalapudi, West Godavari District, stating that the petitioner, namely Boddu Yohan and another, namely T.D. Kargilin, are working as Secretary and Treasurer respectively of Church of South India, Krishna-Godavari Diocese, Vijayawada. That herself and one Pandu Lakshmi Prasanna, are wives of Pandu Jagadish Chandra Pratap Babu and Pandu Jamesh Israel Raju respectively, who are the sons of Pandu Joseph, who is working as a Deanary Chairman, Chinthalapudi. That there are differences between the family members of her father-in-law and the petitioner and T.D. Kargilin. On 04.10.2005, the Bishop of Church...
M. Narasimha Reddy and Another Vs. the Management, A.P Dairy Developme ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
CPK, J. 1 The short questions that arise for consideration in this Writ Appeal are 1) whether the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Additional Labour Court has exceeded its jurisdiction in entertaining the application made by the appellants herein under Section 33 C (2) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act’) and 2) Whether the Voluntary Retirement Scheme notified by the Respondents herein vide circular No.1947/per.V-2/89 dated 03.09.1996 cover the service rendered by the employee/appellant on casual basis. 2 Few facts which are necessary for disposal of the case are as under: The appellant was an employee of the A.P. Dairy Development Co-operative Federation Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘Federation’). He joined in the service initially on casual basis with effect from 01.04.1971 and thereafter he was absorbed into regular service in a time scale. He was there in service till 17.05.1997. While the appellant was in service, the Government of Andhra Pr...
Central Bureau of Investigation, Rep. by Superintendent of Police, Hyd ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
Challenge in this criminal petition is the order dated 12.03.2010 passed by the Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad in S.R.No.948 of 2010, whereby and whereunder, the learned Special Judge referred the complaint filed by the respondent to the C.B.I, Hyderabad, for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. 2. Respondent-Dr.G.Venkateshwar Rao is the complainant in S.R.No.948 of 2010. He filed the complaint against Dr.Seyed E Hasnain S/o late Sri Seyed Mohd. Hasnain and sixteen others complaining various acts of misappropriation of the funds of the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (“CDFD”). The learned Special Judge for CBI Cases perused the complaint and proceeded to refer the same to CBI, Hyderabad, for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., by order dated 12.03.2010. The order dated 12.03.2010 passed by the learned Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad reads as hereunder:- “ This is to inform you that Dr.G.Venkateshwar Rao s/o late Sri Gopala Ra...
Director-hr, Ushodaya Enterprises Pvt. L Vs. Dy. Secy to Govt., State ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO.17913 OF 201.05-10-2012 Director-HR, Ushodaya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Dy. Secy to Govt., State of A.P., Hyd & 4 others Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri SRIDHARAN Counsel for the Respondents : GP for LABOUR : ?CITATIONS:1. AIR 196.SC 31.2. AIR 200.SC 46.3. (1979) I LLJ 1 (SC) : AIR 197.SC 17.4. (1989) 2 SCC 60.5. AIR 196.SC 127.6. 1956 SCR 956.AIR 195.SC 10.7. AIR 195.SC 532.1957 (1) SCR 75.8. (1960) 3 SCR 15.9. (1958) SCR 115.ORDER: The petitioner, a company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Hyderabad filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus or one in the nature of mandamus for the following reliefs: a) declaring Notification G.O. Ms. No. 63, dated 02.08.2008 issued by the Principal Secretary to Government, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Labour, Employment, Training and Factories (Lab-I) Department, as being illegal and nonest and a nullity in l...
M. Narasimha Reddy S/O Balireddy and Ano Vs. the Management, A.P Dairy ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.412 OF 201.05.10.2012 M. Narasimha Reddy S/o Balireddy And another. The Management, A.P Dairy Development Co-Operative Federation Ltd, Lalapet, Hyderabad Rep. by the General Manager (M.P.F)And another. HEAD NOTE: !Counsel for Appellant Sri K.K. Chakravarthy Counsel for 1st Respondent: Sri M. Dilip Rao, Standing counsel for APDDCFL. Counsel for 2nd Respondent: G.P. for Labour. ?Cases referred 1 AIR (SC) (19642. 2003 (2) LLN 70.3 2006 - III - LLJ 4 AIR 200.SC 322.5 2001 (1) SCC 7.ORDER: (Per CPK, J) 1 The short questions that arise for consideration in this Writ Appeal are 1) whether the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Additional Labour Court has exceeded its jurisdiction in entertaining the application made by the appellants herein under Section 33 C (2) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') and 2) Whether the Voluntary Retirement Scheme notified by the Respondents herein vide circular No....
Peddolla Narimulu and Others Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRL.P.NO.1076 OF 201.05.10.2012 Peddolla Narimulu and others State of A.P. Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Putta Krishna Reddy Counsel for respondent: The Additional Public Prosecutor HEAD NOTE: ?Cases referred: ORDER: This criminal petition is filed by the petitioners/A1 to A4 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in Crime No.6 of 2012 of the Chevella Police Station, Ranga Reddy District. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/A1 to A4, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the first respondent/State and none appeared for the second respondent/de facto complainant. 3. The brief facts of the case which is sought to be quashed are as follows: The first accused is the owner and possessor of a piece of land covered by Survey No.195 of an extent of Ac.2.00 situated at Nyalata Village, Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Out of the said land, the first accused offered to sell ...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »