Andhra Pradesh Court June 2015 Judgments
The State of andhra Pradesh, Rep.By The Vs. M/S Polygone Refractories ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2015
HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH AND HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM T.R.C.No.73 of 2002 30-06-2015 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by the State Representative before S.T.A.T., D.No.5-4-404 to 408, Nampally, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. Petitioner M/s Polygone Refractories Ltd., Kollur, Medak District. Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner:Sr.Anil Kumar Learned Special Government Pleader for Telangana. Counsel for the respondent: Sr.M.V.J.Kumar ?.Cases referred: (1993) 16 APSTJ1152 (1988) 6 APSTJ513 2004 (3) SCC42011 (2) SCC620HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH AND HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM T.R.C.No.73 OF2002ORDER:- (per GC,J.This revision case is filed by the Revenue against the order dated 07.02.2002 passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Tribunal Appeal No.682 of 1997, raising the following two questions of law: i) Whether the fire bricks manufactured and sold by the appellant fall under entry 32 o...
Tag this Judgment!M/S.Ventrapathi Financial Serv Vs. The Superintendent ofcentral Excise ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2015
HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH and HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM W.P.No.12350 of 2015 26-06-2015 M/S.Ventrapathi Financial Services.Petitioner The Superintendent of Central Excise and four others . Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sr.T. Vinod Kumar Counsel for the Respondents: Dr.Sr.K.Manmadha Rao, SC for : ?.Cases referred: ORDER:- (per Honble Sr.Justice Challa Kodanda Ram) This writ petition is filed seeking to set aside the Adjudication Order dated 30.05.2014 passed by the 3rd respondent-Joint Commissioner under the provisions of Central Excise Act as adopted for the purpose of collection of service tax notified under the Finance Act, 2013 on the ground that notice preceding passing of final order was not served on the petitioner thereby the petitioner was deprived of an opportunity to put forth their grievance on merits of the matter. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner-firm is a service provider and the address provided by them to the Department is D...
Tag this Judgment!State Water and Sanitation Mission, Err Vs. The a.P. Micro and Small E ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2015
THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.No.13639 of 2014 25-06-2015 State Water and Sanitation Mission, Erramanzil, Hyderabad rep. by its Project Director.Petitioner The A.P.Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Hyderabad & another..Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: GP for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development (TG) Counsel for the Respondents : Sr.S. Dwarakanath ?. Cases referred THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.13639 OF2014ORDER: The State Water and Sanitation Mission is the petitioner herein. The Writ Petition is directed against the Award passed by the 1st respondent, the Andhra Pradesh Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Hyderabad on 05.10.2013 in the proceedings initiated before it by the 2nd respondent company. The 2nd respondent company is a small-scale industry. It has filed a claim petition before the 1st respondent initially seeking Rs.47,24,823/-. It is the case of the 2nd respondent that pursuant to the e-procure...
Tag this Judgment!K. Subrahman Vs. The Border Roads Development Board, Rep
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.23832 OF200924-06-2015 K. Subrahmanyam.Petitioner The Border Roads Development Board, rep. by its Secretary, Government of India, New Delhi and others .Respondents Counsel for petitioner: Sr.Siva Smt.K.Rajya Lakshmi Counsel for respondents:Sr.T. Balaji Sr.B. Narayana Reddy ?. CASES REFERRED: 1. (1979) 2 SCC150= AIR1979SC1060 2. (2000) 8 SCC395= AIR2000SC3243 3. AIR1982MADRAS386(DB) 4. 2006 Writ LR705(DB).5. 2013(5) ABR458= 2013 (6) ALLMR724(DB).6. AIR1999AP335= 1999 (3) ALD632 THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.23832 OF2009ORDER The petitioner, an octogenarian, is aggrieved by the rejection of his claim for certain pensionary benefits by the Director General, Border Roads, New Delhi, the second respondent, under letter dated 22.05.2009 (wrongly mentioned as 22.05.2008).There is no dispute as to the petitioners entitlement to pensionary benefits from 04.04.1979. He has been agitating his grievance in connection therewi...
Tag this Judgment!Paneem Mana Vs. State of andhra Pradesh, Rep.By Its Pri
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO Writ Petition No.16336 of 2015 24-06-2015 Paneem Manasa .. Petitioner State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary to Higher Education Department, Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad, and another...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Naga Praveen Vankayalapati Counsel for the Respondent: G.P. for Higher Education for R-1 Sri C. Sudesh Anand, learned standing counsel for R-2 ?. Cases referred:1. (2008) 4 SCC2732. 2005 (5) ALD3243. 1993 ALT Supp (1) 287 (DB) 4. 2006 (5) ALD2755. 1995 (3) ALD426(DB) 6. 1984 (4) SCC277. 1993 (1) ALT393(DB) 8. 2010 (1) ALD828THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO Writ Petition No.16336 of 2015 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the second respondent.2. The petitioner is a student who appeared for the A.P. EAMCET examination notified on 03.03.2015. The common entrance test was conducted on 08.05.2015 and she appeared for the ag...
Tag this Judgment!T.Venkatramana @ Sivala Venkatra Vs. The Collector (Civil Supplies) Ch ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
THE HONOURABLE Sr.JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.37767 of 2012 24-6-2015 T.Venkatramana @ Sivala Venkatramana Petitioner The Collector (Civil Supplies) Chittoor District, Chittoor and others Respondents COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: Mr.Chetluru Sreenivas COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS : A.G.P.for Civil Supplies (AP) ...
Tag this Judgment!Tadikamalla Venkata Ramana Kishore A Vs. Padarthi Santhakumari and Oth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL No.29 OF201124-06-2015 Tadikamalla Venkata Ramana Kishore and .. Appellants Padarthi Santhakumari and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Appellants: Counsel for Respondents : ?. CASES REFERRED:1. AIR1969AP3182. 2011 (4) ALT1713. AIR1977AP3464. AIR1968Madras 216 5. AIR1983A.P.13 6. AIR1967A.P.243 THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL No.29 of 2011 JUDGMENT: Respondent Nos.2 and 3 in I.P.No.26 of 2004 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur preferred this appeal questioning the judgment and decree in A.S.No.16 of 2009 passed by II Additional District Judge, Guntur, dated 29.04.2011.2. For convenience of preference, the ranks given to the parties in I.P.No.26 of 2004 before I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur will be adopted throughout the judgment.3. The petitioner (first respondent herein) filed I.P.No.26 of 2004 under Section 9 of Provincial In...
Tag this Judgment!1.S.M.Fazlullah Shah Quadri and 3 Oth Vs. 1.Nemali Krishna and Three O ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2015
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.29 of 2014 24-06-2015 1.S.M.Fazlullah Shah Quadri and 3 others. Appellants 1.Nemali Krishna and three others . Respondents Counsel for the Appellants: Sri G.V. Ramana Murthy Counsel for Respondents: Dr. Venkat Reddy Donthi Reddy : ?. Cases referred:1. AIR1968SC11652. AIR1972SC22993. (2004) 1 SCC769THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.29 of 2014 JUDGMENT: This appeal under Order XLIII Rule (1)(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the Code for short) by the unsuccessful defendants/appellants is directed against the order dated 20.09.2013 of the learned I Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy passed in IA.No.2297 of 2012 in OS.No.942 of 2012 filed by the plaintiffs/respondents under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code for a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of Ac.2.38 guntas of land in surve...
Tag this Judgment!Sunil Sar Vs. Smt.A. Sravan
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2015
THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO C.R.P.No.2175 of 2015 23-06-2015 Sunil Saraogi.Petitioner Smt.A.Sravanthi .Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Sr.K.B.Ramanna Dora Counsel for the Respondent: Sr.Chetluru Srinivas ?.Cases referred THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO C.R.P.No.2175 of 2015 ORDER: The petitioner herein, who is the defendant in the civil suit, O.S.No.704 of 2014, is aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned XVI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Malkajgiri in I.A.No.315 of 2014. The plaintiff / respondent herein filed the suit for eviction of the defendant petitioner from the suit scheduled property and for delivering the vacant position thereof to her. The plaintiff also prayed for a sum of Rs.54,41,874/- to be paid towards arrears of rent together with the interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the suit till the same is realized and also sought for future mesne profits. The plaintiff has also filed I.A.No....
Tag this Judgment!The State of Ap,rep. by S.T.A.T, Hydera Vs. 1.M/S. Durga Enterprises,b ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2015
THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH AND THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM T.RC.Nos.71 of 2002 23-06-2015 The State of AP, rep. by S.T.A.T, Hyderabad.....Appellant 1.M/S.Durga Enterprises, Bandar Road, Vijayawada......Respondent Counsel for the appellant:Spl. Govt., Pleader for Taxes. Counsel for respondent:Sr.M.V.J.K.Kumar ?.Cases referred: 1999 (Vol.114) 550 THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH & THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM T.RC.Nos.71 & 91 of 2002 Common Order: (per GC,J.Both the T.R.Cs are filed under Section 22(1) and Rule 10 of the A.P.G.S.T Act (for short the Act).raising the following common questions of law. 1. Whether the commodity (chair seats and back rests) Fall under Entry 17 of the Sixth Schedule or unclassified item falling in the Seventh Schedule?. 2. Whether the judgment of the Honble High court in the case of M/S.NOL Industries Ltd versus State of A.P.reported in 114 STC550is applicable to this case?. 3. Whether the S.T.A.T is justified in setting a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »