Court : Andhra Pradesh
THE HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.730 OF201412-06-2014 M.Subba Rao Appellant B.Vasanth and others Respondents Counsel for Appellant: Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana Counsel for Respondent No.1: Counsel for Respondents 2 to 5: G.P. for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development HEAD NOTE: ?. CASES REFERRED: THE HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.730 OF2014JUDGMENT: (per Honble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal is admitted in so far as the order under appeal relates to disposal of W.P. No.1657 of 2014. We do not require any notice to be served upon the writ petitioner/the first respondent as he would not be affected by the judgment and order proposed to be passed by us. The recordings of the Honble trial Judge are good enough to decide the matter at this stage finally. It is the admitted position that after conclusion of the hearin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI Writ Petition No.2539 of 2007 12-06-2014 M.Jannamma W/o. late Mohan Reddy R/o. Surampally Village, Doulatabad Mandal, Medak District. Petitioner 1. Union of India rep. by its Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Loknayak Bhavan, (Hyderabad Freedom Fighters Cell), New Delhi, and another. Respondents Counsel for Petitioner : Sri Subba Rao Korrapati Counsel for Respondents : Sri P. Vishnuvardhan Reddy, Assistant Solicitor General G.P. for Revenue HEAD NOTE: ?. Cases referred 1. (2007) 4 SCR6862. (2012) 11 SCC7543. (2001) 8 SCC84. 2013 (5) ALD173THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No.2539 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed assailing the proceedings No.52/CC/48/2002-FF(HC-C), dated 20.11.2006 issued by the 1st respondent-Union of India as arbitrary and illegal, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme 1980 (for short th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
THE HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.730 OF201412-06-2014 M. Subba Rao Appellant B. Vasanth and others Respondents Counsel for Appellant: Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana Counsel for Respondent No.1: ^Counsel for Respondents 2 to 5 : G.P. for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development HEAD NOTE: ?. CASES REFERRED: THE HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.730 OF2014JUDGMENT: (per Honble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal is admitted in so far as the order under appeal relates to disposal of W.P. No.1657 of 2014. We do not require any notice to be served upon the writ petitioner/the first respondent as he would not be affected by the judgment and order proposed to be passed by us. The recordings of the Honble trial Judge are good enough to decide the matter at this stage finally. It is the admitted position that after conclusion of the he...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. SUNIL CHOWDARY REFERENCE CASE No.82 of 1999 12-06-2014 M/s. Priyadarshini Spinning Mills Ltd.,Hyderabad Applicant Commissioner of Income-tax AP-I, Hyderabad.... Respondent !Counsel for the Applicant: Sri S. Ravi Counsel for the Respondent :Sri S.R. Ashok : ?.Cases referred :1969. AIR267HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. SUNIL CHOWDARY REFERENCE CASE No.82 of 1999 JUDGMENT: (Per Honble Sri Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) The Finance Act, 1998 brought about substantial changes in the Income Tax Act, particularly, in the regime of depreciations. Till then, depreciations used to be allowed on individual assets, held by an assesee, whether an individual or an industry or a business undertaking. Through the amendment, the concept of block assets was introduced. The expression block assets is defined under Section 11 of Section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (for short the Act) as, pool of tangi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member) 1.Being dis-satisfied with the order passed by the District Forum partly allowing the complaint, the complainant has filed the appeal challenging the order of the District Consumer Forum, Ranga Reddy District which directed the respondents 1 and 2 to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- along with interest @ 3.5% p.a. from 01.08.2008 ` and dismissed the complaint against the respondent no. 3. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant deposited an amount of Rs.5,300/- to the respondents 1 and 2 by way of cheque bearing No. 120995 drawn on third respondent bank, Kothapet branch, Hyderabad and the respondents issued Deep Discount Bond -96 Certificate Folio bearing No. FDDB 1546639 and certificate bearing No. 01609368 on 18.03.2021 for the maturity amount of Rs. 2 lakh with Right to choose option to Redeem the bond (1) on 01.08.2000 at Rs.10,000/-, (2) on 01.12.2006 at Rs.25,000/-, (3) on 01.09.2011 at Rs.50,000/- and (4) on 01.06.2016 at Rs.1,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR Writ Appeal No.933 of 2014 11-6-2014 The Sub-Inspector of Police, Ramkote, Narayanaguda Police Station Hyderabad Andhra Pradesh Appellant A.V. Santosh Kumar and othersRespondents !COUNSEL FOR APPEALLANT: Sri Mavidi Rama Rao COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1: Mrs. D. Satyavathi COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NOs.4 to 7: Government Pleader for Home HEAD NOTE: ?.CITATIONS: [2013]. 4 Crimes (SC) 243 THE HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.933 OF2014JUDGMENT: (per the Honble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge of this Court dt.30.12.2013 by which His Lordship did not grant any relief as prayed for by the respondent - writ petitioner, as it was not necessary because immediately after filing of the writ petition the relief sought for was really accede...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member) 1. The opposite party is the appellant. The appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum which allowed the complaint and directed the appellant to return the amount of Rs.10 lakhs with interest @ 18% pa and for payment of Rs.5,000/- towards costs. The respondent filed complaint seeking direction to the appellant to supply 500 bags of cement or in the alternative for refund of the sum of Rs.10 lakhs with interest @ 18% pa from 25.01.2011 till payment and a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards costs. 2. The respondent requisitioned the appellant for supply of 5000 bags of cement for construction of house at Karimnagar and paid a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs each through two Demand drafts bearing No. 118810 and 118811 dated 25.01.2011. In his letter the respondent mentioned the place for cement bags to be supplied was at Karimnagar. The appellant encashed the demand drafts and failed to supply the cement bags whereon the respondent addressed a lette...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY and THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM R.C.No.5 of 1997 10-06-2014 Commissioner of Income Tax Andhra Pradesh-I, Hyderabad ..APPELLANT Smt.S.Premalatha....RESPONDENT COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT:- Sr.S.R.Ashok COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT:-Sr.Y.Ratnakar : ?. Cases Referred: 1.162 ITR4682.222 ITR7373.233 ITR4684.(1971) 82 ITR570(SC) 5.(1986) 160 ITR253(AP) 6.(1972) 83 ITR700THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM R.C.No.5 of 1997 ORDER: (per the Honble Sr.Justice L.Narasimha Reddy) This reference is at the instance of the Revenue. The respondent is an assessee and she undertakes the activity of construction of buildings, giving them on lease and other allied activities. Certain extent of land owned by the Young Mens Christian Association at Secunderabad was taken on lease by the respondent. In terms of the agreement between the parties, construction was made and buildings were given on lease. The expenditur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM R.C.No.46 of 1999 10-06-2014 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra Pradesh-I, Hyderabad. Applicant State Bank of Hyderabad, Hyderabad. Respondent !Counsel for the Applicant :Sr.S.R.Ashok, Learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department Counsel for the respondent :Sr.S. Dwarakanath, Learned Counsel for the Respondent : ?. Cases referred: 175 ITR607HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM R.C.No.46 of 1999 ORDER:- (per LNR,J.This reference is made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad B Bench at the instance of Commissioner of Income Tax, A.P.-I, Hyderabad framing the following question: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT is correct in law in holding that the overdue interest on the demand bills is not chargeable to tax under the Interest Tax Act, 1974?. The respondent is a Nationalised Bank and as part of its transactions, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR Crl. Petition No.4161 of 2014 09-06-2014 Goenka Sajan Kumar... Petitioner/A.2 The State of A.P., rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad... Respondent/ Complainant Counsel for the Petitioner :Sri P. Vamsheedhar Reddy Counsel for Respondent :Public Prosecutor : ?.Cases referred:1. 2013 (2) ALD (Crl.) 393 (AP) HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR Crl. Petition No.4161 of 2014 Date:09. 06.2014 HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Crl. Petition No.4161 of 2014 ORDER: The petitioner allegedly committed offences under the provisions of Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (the Act, for short).2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that according to the prosecution, the petitioner is one of the customers of a brothel house and not a person running the brothel house or acting as a pip for the personnel in the brothel house. He submitted that under the provisions of the Act, a customer to the brothel house is not ...
Tag this Judgment!