Andhra Pradesh Court December 2015 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.
K.S. Brahmananda Rao Vs. State bank of India Rep by its General Manage ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-2015
Oral Order: 1. In this writ petition, petitioner challenges continuation of the disciplinary proceedings commenced in pursuant to issuance of charge memo dated 29.6.2004 on the ground that on the same set of facts and evidence, he was acquitted in criminal case. 2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel for respondent bank. 3. Facts which are relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue in this writ petition are as under: While petitioner was working as Clerk-cum-Cashier in the Komaragiripatnam, Allavaram mandal, East Godavari District, petitioner was served with a charge memo dated 29.6.2004 leveling various allegations. Substance of the allegations is, having received the cash from the depositor, he did not remit the amount to the concerned account; made fictitious credit entries in the ledger transactions sheet; illegally credited the draft of a customer into the joint account of the petitioner and his mother; on the day cash was received from the cu...
M/s. Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd. Vs. ILandFS Trust Co. Ltd. rep. by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
Ramesh Ranganathan, J. M/s. Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited (the petitioner herein) has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action taken by ILandFS Trust Company Limited (the first respondent) in issuing notice dated 15.07.2013, the subsequent possession notice dated 08.11.2013, and in contemplating taking physical possession under the orders in the Criminal M.Ps pending before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrates, Hyderabad and Vijayawada as illegal and arbitrary; to declare that the first respondent is not entitled to invoke the provisions of the SARFAESI Act; to declare the action taken by the first respondent under the SARFAESI Act, with respect to the assets of the petitioner-Company, as null and void; and to consequently direct the first respondent to restore symbolic possession of the properties of the petitioner taken over by it under the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner publishes daily newspapers both in English and Telugu under the nam...
G.V. Mohan and Another Vs. The State of Telangana and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
Common Order: 1. Both these writ petitions relate to the same property and while the petitioners in the former writ petition i.e., W.P.No.23030 of 2015 are owners and the petitioner in the latter writ petition i.e., W.P.No.23923 of 2015 claims to be an agreement holder from the owners and had filed a suit in O.S.No.118 of 2003 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for specific performance of the agreement of sale and the same is stated to be pending. 2. The petitioners in the former writ petition question the notice, dated 16-07-2015 issued by the 3rd respondent under Section 37(2) of the Central Act 30/13 notifying the award and further notice, dated 16-07-2015 for taking possession of the land in question. 3. In the latter writ petition, the petitioner questions the action of the respondents in acquiring the land in question on the ground that the description of the affected land was different in the preliminary notification issued by the 3rd respond...
Konala Saheb Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by Principal ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
1. The petitioner is a Secretary of Penumantra Large Sized Co-operative Society Ltd., (5th respondent). Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies dated 08.10.2015 and consequential decision of the Person-in-Charge Committee vide Resolution No.2 dated 13.10.2015 and the communication of the order suspending the petitioner from service by proceedings of the President, person-in-charge Committee dated 13.10.2015. 2. A reading of the order of suspension dated 13.10.2015 and the order of the District Registrar dated 08.10.2015 would show that in the enquiry conducted under Section 51 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act (for short the Act'), certain financial irregularities were noticed and the enquiry findings point out prima-facie involvement of the petitioner. Having regard to the grave financial irregularities, in the process of initiating the disciplinary action, the petitioner's services are placed under suspension. 3. Learned c...
M/s. A.B. Mauri India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
Common Order: (Ramesh Ranganathan, J.) The relief sought for, in this batch of Writ Petitions, is to quash the assessment orders, passed for different assessment periods in respect of the very same assessee, levying purchase tax under Section 4(4)(iii) of the A.P. VAT Act on goods sold in the course of export out of the territory of India. Counsel on either side are in agreement that the facts in W.P. No.26129 of 2012 can be taken as illustrative of the facts in this batch of Writ Petitions. The petitioner, a company registered under the Companies Act, has branches in different parts of the country including one at the Special Economic zone Kakkanad, Cochin, and another in Secunderabad. They are engaged in the business of trading in yeast, bakery ingredients and chillies. A substantial part of their operations is said to be of direct export of chillies to foreign countries through its branch at Cochin, and its importer and exporter Code Number is stated to be 0288001532. According to t...
Nusun Genetic Research Ltd. and Others Vs. The State of Telangana and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
Common Order: 1. These are the two sets of six quash petitions to quash the Calendar Case proceedings, six in number covered by these petitions, leave about another quash petition in Crl.P.No.3774 of 2015 also said to have been pending before another Bench. 2. The six quash petitions besides another one pending before another Bench in Crl.P.No.3774 of 2015 are between lending party M/s.Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., (company) under the Companies Act, 1956, represented by its authorized signatory, N.Murali Krishna, the complainant, respectively in all cases for the offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short the Act') for dishonour of respective cheques, maintained against the entity (company) M/s. Nusun Genetic Research Limited, under the Companies Act, represented by its Managing Director, P.Vidyasagar as A1 and said P.Vidyasagar personally as A2 and other two directors viz., P.Chandravathi and P.Vamsi Krishna as A3 and A4, respectively. 3. The four a...
Meer Mustafa Ali (Died) and Another Vs. Syed Afsar Ali Khan
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
1. The respondent is a tenant under the petitioners in respect of a mulgi which was leased out to him under a lease deed dated 01-01-1980. In the said mulgi, he was running a tea stall and a pan shop. Initially, the rent was Rs.300/- per month. As on the date of filing of the R.C., the rent was Rs.850/- per month. The petitioners filed the R.C., under Sections 10(2)(iii), 10(2)(iv) and 12 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (the Act, for short) seeking eviction of the respondent from the schedule premises. The eviction was sought on the grounds viz., that the respondent was committing acts of waste, causing nuisance and disturbance to the inhabitants of the other mulgies and that he has been keeping the shop till late night by playing music in a loud voice. The other ground is that the mulgi leased out to the respondent and the remaining mulgies, which were leased out to some other tenants, were constructed long ago, that the buildings in the vi...
Keerti Rajesham and Others Vs. The State of Telangana rep. by its Prl. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
Common Order: Both these Writ Petitions are filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2- Municipality in seeking to dispossess the petitioners by demolishing the shops/temporary structures raised by them in Survey No.87 PP situated near water tank, Mancherial, Adilabad District, without following the due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary. From the pleadings of both the parties, it is evident that the petitioners have occupied a road margin in the aforesaid survey number, raised structures thereon and have been carrying on their respective businesses. There is, however, a dispute as to the nature of these structures. While it is the case of the petitioners that these are temporary structures, respondent No.2 has pleaded that they are permanent structures. Be that as it may, in the counter-affidavit of respondent No.2, it is stated that 698 street vendors were identified and given identity cards by the Town Vending Committee (for short the Committee'). However, h...
M/s. Cheminnova Remedies Private Limited Vs. M/s. Indras Agencies Priv ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-2015
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. This OSA is preferred calling in question the correctness of the order dated 16.02.2015 passed by the learned Company Judge in Company Petition No. 21 of 2014. The respondent herein moved the said Company Petition for winding up the appellant company for its inability to liquidate the amount due and payable to it. The respondent has pointed out in the Company Petition that the appellant is a manufacturer of drugs and other pharmaceutical preparations and that the respondent used to supply material to the appellant company based upon purchase orders placed on it and several invoices were raised from time to time and that the appellant has fallen in arrears of payment of Rs.57,95,735/- on account of its unit-I and an amount of Rs.27,65,699/- on account of Unit-II, aggregating to Rs.85,61,434/- as on 31.03.2011 which remained unpaid. This apart, the appellant company has specifically acknowledged as due a sum of Rs.71,03,491/- as on 18.05.2010 and agreed to pay th...
K. Madhava Reddy Vs. The Vice Chairman and Housing Commissioner, Andhr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-08-2015
Common Order: 1. In all these writ petitions, petitioners are employees working in Andhra Pradesh Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board). The writ petitions are filed aggrieved by the individual service grievances on various issues concerning the conditions of service of the petitioners in the employment of the respondent housing board. 2. Placing reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court rendered in W.P.No.27530 of 2008 and batch dated 06.11.2014 learned standing counsel for the Andhra Pradesh Housing Board raised objection on maintainability of the writ petitions. Learned standing counsel contended that petitioners in all the writ petitions are employees of the Board and the grievance raised concerns their conditions of service. Jurisdiction to adjudicate service disputes vests in the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (APAT), whereas without exhausting the remedy provided under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (for short, Act, 1985'), these...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »