Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
T. Sridhar Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2015
1. The issue in the present writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, arises under the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Licence of Selling by Shop and Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2012, notified vide G.O.Ms.No.391, Revenue (Ex.II) Department, dated 18.06.2012 and the challenge is to the confirmation of A4 licence by the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Kurnool, Kurnool Distinct/fourth respondent herein, in favour of fifth respondent herein. 2. The facts and circumstances, leading to the filing of the instant writ petition are, as infra:- 2.1. The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Kurnool/fourth respondent herein in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Licence of Selling by Shop and Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter called the Rules') issued a gazette notification dated 30.06.2015, inviting applications for consideration for grant of licence for A4 shops for the period, commencing from 01.07....
Kalluri Krishan Pushkar Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2015
1. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, the CrPC') by the Petitioner-Accused to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.103 of 2014 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Economic offences, Hyderabad, taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections under Section 276 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short, the Act') amended from time to time, on the complaint under Section 190 read with 200 Cr.P.C. of the 1st respondent/The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1) Hyderabad. 2. The petitioner is the sole accused in the Calander Case supra. The 1st respondent laid the complaint with the prior sanction under Section 279(1) of the Act for his prosecution, obtained from the Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad vide order dated 27.03.2014. The factual background is that the petitioner filed E-return for the assessment year 2012-13 of dated 30.09.2012 (Section 139-D makes provision for filing of E-return from the Rules pro...
R. Biksham and Others Vs. The District Collector, Mahabubnagar and Oth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2015
Common Order: The petitioners in this batch of cases share the same grievance. All the writ petitions are therefore amenable to disposal by this common order. The complaint of the petitioners was that the goods vehicles in which they were transporting sand were seized and they were directed to pay penalty. In some cases, such penalty was levied as a measure of compounding an offence while in others, it was imposed as a penalty per se. The imposition of penalties in all the cases was under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 (hereinafter, referred to as the Act of 2002'). In Writ Petition Nos. 15434, 15435, 15444, 15445, 15446, 15447, 15448 and 15895 of 2012, notices in this regard were issued by the Tahsildars of Kodangal and Bomraspet Mandals and in W.P.No.13427 of 2012, the Tahsildar of Kalwakurthy Mandal, stating that the goods vehicle in question was transporting sand illegally and that a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- was imposed upon each such vehicle u...
Battina Subbalakshmi Vs. The Kovvur Co-operative Urban Bank Limited, K ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2015
Aggrieved by the reversing judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Kovvur, West Godavari District, in A.S.No.193 of 2012, the plaintiff in O.S.No.79 of 2000 on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, from which the said appeal arose, is before this Court in second appeal. O.S.No.79 of 2000 was filed for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 09.07.1997 (Ex.A1), by directing the first defendant in the suit to discharge the mortgage debt due from him to Kovvur Co-operative Urban Bank Limited, Kovvur, the second defendant, thereby redeeming the said mortgage, and to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property. By judgment dated 19.04.2012, the trial Court decreed the suit. Parties shall hereinafter be referred to as arrayed before the trial Court. The case of the plaintiff was that the first defendant got the suit schedule property from his mother under a registered sett...
Vasa Soma Sundara Andal Sampoorja Saraswathi and Others Vs. Konduru Lo ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2015
1. This Revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dt.08.07.2010 in I.A.No.552 of 2009 in O.S.No.14 of 2007 on the file of Additional District Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional District Court, West Godavari, Eluru. 2. The petitioners in the Revision are plaintiffs in the above suit. 3. The petitioners herein are first, third and fourth daughters of one Late K. Gangaraju. Their father was the adopted son of a person also known as Late K. Gangaraju. The respondents are the brothers of petitioners. 4. The petitioners alleged that plaint Aand Bschedule properties originally belonged to their father and he had obtained them from his father; that their father and respondents divided these properties under a registered partition deed dt.19.10.1981; in the said partition, Aschedule properties fell to the share of their father; both plaint Aand Bschedule properties are the self-acquired properties of their father; their father executed a Will dt.03.0...
Puramsetti Satya Ramesh Vs. The State of AP Rep by its Principal Secre ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-2015
Common Order: 1. Petitioner in W.P. No 2834 of 2015 is Upa-Sarpanch of Tirumalayapalem Gram Panchayat and petitioners in W.P. No. 3902 of 2015 are residents of the Tirumalayapalem village. In both writ petitions, petitioners challenge the orders of the District Panchayat Officer, Kakinada East Godavari district dated: nil-10.2014 signed on 4.2.2015 reviewing his earlier order and restoring the power to withdraw the monies through bankers cheques by the Sarpanch-3rd respondent. 2. Heard Sri C.Ramachandra Raju, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj (Andhra) for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri T V Jaggi Reddy for third respondent. 3. Sri C Ramachandra Raju, learned counsel for petitioners contended that based on the complaint given by Upasarpanch and villagers alleging misuse of funds of the Gram Panchayat and misappropriation, show cause notice was issued to 3rd respondent calling upon him to submit explanation on the allegations why action should not b...
The Union of India, Rep. by the General Manager, S.C. Railway, Secunde ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-2015
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. The Union of India and the officials of the Ministry of Railways are the petitioners herein. They call in question the correctness of the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench in O.A.No. 132 of 2012 instituted by the 1st respondent employee of the Railways. The 1st respondent is appointed as a Bungalow Peon and he has been attached to the 4th petitioner herein. However, on the ground that he was continuously absent unauthorizedly for a period of 91 days, he has been subjected to disciplinary control. An Inquiry Officer has been appointed to conduct a detailed inquiry in accordance with the Railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1968 (for short, the Rules'), but however, no Presenting Officer has been appointed to conduct the proceedings before the said Inquiry Officer on behalf of the Ministry of Railways. The Inquiry Officer himself not only presented the witnesses but also went on to cross-examine and invite a defence b...
M/s. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Pr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-2015
Common Order: Ramesh Ranganathan, J. 1. M/s. Larsen and Toubro Ltd, Hyderabad filed W.P. Nos.23034 and 22960 of 2007, W.P. No.8122 and 9016 of 2008, W.P. Nos.8006 and 15121 of 2009, W.P. No.8955 of 2010, W.P. Nos.10711 and 23689 of 2011, W.P. No.6834 of 2012, W.P. No.39431 of 2013 and W.P. No.14457 of 2014. Alstom Projects India Ltd filed W.P. Nos.4763 and 12745 of 2009, and W.P. No.26994 of 2011. M/s. Siemens Ltd, Hyderabad filed W.P. Nos.16857, 16909 and 16945 of 2009, W.P. No. 25776 of 2010, W.P. No.8664 of 2013 and W.P. No.14192 of 2014. BGR Energy Systems Ltd, Nellore filed W.P. No.19516 of 2009. All the petitioners have executed turnkey projects for different customers. They claimed that the goods supplied by them, for being used in the turnkey projects, were subsequent sales exempt from tax under Section 6(2) of the CST Act, import sales under Section 5(2) of the CST Act, and the respondents lacked jurisdiction to subject these transactions to tax under the AP VAT Act treating t...
Shaik Mahboob Basha and Others Vs. Union of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-2015
1. This is an appeal by the unsuccessful applicants assailing the judgment dated 05.11.2007 of the III Member of Secunderabad Bench of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad passed in O.A.A.No.253 of 2001. 2. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned Standing Counsel for Union of India/Railways. I have perused the material record. 3. The history of the case, in brief, is this: The applicants are the parents and the sister of Shaik Samdani Basha, the deceased. They had filed the claim petition before the Railway Claims Tribunal claiming a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- for the loss sustained by them on account of the untimely death of the said deceased due to his involvement in an untoward incident, viz., accidental fall from a train. The Railways had resisted the said claim by filing a counter before the Tribunal. At trial, AWs 1 and 2 were examined on the side of the applicants and exhibits A1 to A5 were marked. While adjudicating the lis...
Narendra Urangi and Others Vs. M/s. Greenmint India Agritech Pvt. Ltd. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2015
Common Order : 1) The petitioners in Crl.P.No.11336 of 2014 are A-3 to A-5 and the petitioners in Crl.P.No.13561 of 2014 are A-1 and A-2 of C.C. No.262 of 2014 on the file of II Special Magistrate, Hyderabad for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, outcome of the private complaint filed by the 1st respondent-complainant for dishonour of the cheque bearing No.369876, dated 19.02.2014 for Rs.50,00,000/-. It is from the cause of action and after statutory notice, dated 24.02.2014 served on the accused persons 1 to 5 covered by acknowledgments dated 25.02.2014 and after the statutory waiting for non-payment and no reply, the complaint is filed. 2) The present quash petitions filed “ (a) so far as by the petitioners A-3 to A-5 are that they are mere directors and they are no way responsible for the day to day affairs of the Company which is a statutory requirement under Section 141 of the N.I.Act with specific allegations in the complaint for taking ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »