Andhra Pradesh Court June 2014 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.
M.Jannamma W/O. Late Mohan Reddy R/O. Su Vs. 1. Union of India Rep. by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-12-2014
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...
M. Subba Vs. B. Vasanth and Ot
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-12-2014
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...
M.Subba Vs. B.Vasanth and Ot
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-12-2014
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...
Mathangi Devasahayam S/O. Rubenu @ Naga Vs. Jetty Manikyamma W/O. Prak ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-12-2014
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4481 of 2012 12-06-2014 Mathangi Devasahayam S/o. Rubenu @ Nagaiah Appellant Jetty Manikyamma W/o. Prakasa Rao and others Respondents Counsel for the Appellant: Sri Posani Venkateswarlu Counsel for the Respondents :None : : ?.Cases referred : AIR1991Kerala 259 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4481 of 2012 ORDER: The respondents filed O.S No.709 of 2010 in the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, against the petitioner for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The basis for the suit is a Will, dated 10.02.2010 (Ex.A-6), said to have been executed by the mother of the petitioner and the respondents. The plea of the petitioner was that the property was purchased by him and since he happened to be a Government Employee, the sale deed was obtained in the name of his mother and that she did not have any right to execute a will. It was also pleaded ...
My Home Industries Ltd. a/K/a My Home Cement Industries Ltd. Rep by It ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jun-11-2014
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...
K. Visweswari Vs. Industrial Development Bank of India, Mumbai, Rep by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jun-11-2014
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,...
The Sub-inspector of Police, Ramkote, Na Vs. A.V. Santosh Kumar and O
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-11-2014
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...
Commissioner of Income Tax Andhra Prades Vs. Smt.S.Premalat
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-10-2014
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...
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra P Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-10-2014
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, ...
Goenka Sajan Kum Vs. the State of A.P., Rep.by Public Prosecu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-09-2014
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 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »