Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1995(3)ALT1; I(1996)DMC48
B.K. Somasekhara, J.1. The judgment and the decree of the learned District Judge, Adilabad (Mr. V.V.S. Krishna Murty) in O.S. No. 35 of 1971 dated 5.11.1982 have been the subject of assailment in this appeal. The appellants are the plaintiffs and the respondents are the defendants in the suit. The suit was dismissed.2. Defendant No. 3 is the father and Defendant No. 4 is the mother of the plaintiffs. The suit is filed for declaration of title and possession of the suit property which is described in the suit schedule as Survey No. 764 of Mudhole with an extent of Acs. 34-14 guntas of land. The plaintiffs claim their title to the suit property; while they were the minor, their mother Defendant No. 4 alienated the suit property in favour of Defendant No. 1 under the suit sale deed Ex. A.2 equivalent of Ex. B.I dated 16.10.1956 without consideration, without any legal necessity, under the pressure and influence of their father, defendant No. 3, who was very easy going and gay in his style...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1996(4)ALT1138
Lingaraja Rath, J.1. Questions of deep significance, some of which in many respects are perplexing in nature have teen referred to this Bench in the context of consideration of the vires of Sections 10 and 22 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act.').2. W.P. No. 9717 of 1983 was filed as public interest litigation raising the question of vires of the Sections. During the hearing of the case the learned single Judge felt the matter should be appropriately heard by a Division Bench as 'this case raises very important questions touching the personal law of the Christians as contained in 1 he Indian Divorce Act.' The learned Judge also felt that it is appropriate for the Court to hear representations of organisations of the Christian community including of women which should be vitally interested in the matter. Notices were issued to seven organisations whose names were ascertained from the Bar and permission was also allowed to any other person, organisation ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1997]106STC387(AP)
ORDERSyed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. M/s. Hindustan Shipyard Limited, Visakhapatnam, is the petitioner in these tax revision cases. As facts giving rise to these cases and contentions urged are common, we have heard them together and are disposing of by a common judgment. 2. The petitioner, under different contracts, delivers ships to various persons. It is the nature of the transaction which is the subject-matter of these contracts that is debated before us. The contention of the petitioner is that the nature of transaction covered by the contracts is one of the agreement to build the ship, in other words a works contract. Whereas the contention of the sale tax authorities is that the transaction was nothing but sale of goods. The assessing authorities levied the tax on those transaction treating them as agreements of sale of ships. The appellate authority - Deputy Commissioner dismissed the appeals. Not satisfied with the orders of the appellate authority - Deputy Commissioner, the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1997]227ITR446(AP)
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. 1. Common questions of law are urged in these writ petitions, so they are heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. For appreciating the facts which give rise to the questions referred to hereunder it will be enough to refer to the fact in WP No. 7516 of 1992 which are representative of the facts in the other writ petitions. 2. The petitioners are challenging the constitutional validity of s. 43B and s. 36(1)(va) of the IT Act, 1961, in so far as they provide for disallowance of the employer's contribution to provident fund, contribution to the employees' State insurance fund and the payment of employees' contribution to the provident fund and contribution to the employees' State insurance fund when the same are paid after the due dates in the respective Acts. 3. The petitioner is a private limited company. It is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of electronic connectors for the defence sector and it is registered as a sm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(5)ALD590; 1998(5)ALT385
ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J. 1. Thepetitioner are said to be practising Advocates, who appeared for the written test and viva voce held pursuant to the recruitment notification issued by the High Court in October, 1996. According to the petitioner, they qualified themselves in the selection. In fact, some of the petitioners alleged that their names were included in the original list of selected candidates sent up by the High Court to the Government. But later on, their names were deleted on the application of the principle of carry forward of vacancies reserved forwomen and left unfilled. In Writ Petition No. 18307 of 1998 filed by five petitioners, the prayer is to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners as District Munsifs in response to the Notification dated 23-10-1996 adjudging their candidature in accordance with their merit and not to keep the posts vacant, but to fill them in accordance with law. Writ Petition No.21451 of 1998 is filed by four petitioners who seek a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(2)ALD652; 2000(2)ALT655
ORDER1. Political Justice is a preambular promise of the Constitution of India. 'We, the people of India' shall redeem the promise of 'political justice' is the underlying theme of the Constitution (Seventy Fourth Amendment) Act, 1992. The apprehension of the petitioners in this Batch of cases is that while attempting to achieve political justice, guaranteed right to 'equal protection of laws' another preambular promise is ignored. A deeper curial look is called for. On the eve of elections: to a century and odd urban local bodies-Nagar Panchayats, Municipalities and Municipal Corporations in the State of Andhra Pradesh,all questions raised and all issues involved in these cases are the same and hence are being disposed of by this common judgment, at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the respondents.2. Reservation of seats in Educational Institutions, reservation of civil posts and quasi-Government posts and reservation of seats in l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(2)ALT607
ORDERB.S.A Swamy, J. 1. The vexed issue of regularization of the services of the employees who are appointed under different nomenclatures like daily wage workers, casual labourers, consolidated employees, N.M.Rs. for starvation wages and continued as such for over a number of years without regularization has come to the fore again in these batch of writ petitions. The petitioners in these batch of Writ Petitions numbering more than 200 are working in different organizations under the control of the Government of Andhra Pradesh, whose existence is traceable to either statutes or executive orders issued by the Government, floated to give effect to the popular schemes to catch the vote banks, from time to time after 1975 and their existence cannot be dispensed with now. This is the second or third round of litigation for some of the petitioners. I feel that some more writ petitioners seeking similar relief are pending in this Court apart from hundreds of cases filed by the temporary empl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(3)ALD156; 2001(3)ALT272
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ 1. This writ petition is directed against order dated 13-6-2000 passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in OA No.5582 of 1999, whereby and whereunder the Original Application filed by the 1st respondent herein was allowed with the following directions:'Thus, the impugned order issued by the 2nd respondent in Lr.No.A2/Fen/2424/ 98-99, dated 13-1-1999 is set aside. The respondents are directed to sanction and pay to the applicant his pensionary benefits and gratuity taking into consideration service rendered by him from 14-8-1963 to 3-1-1973 as DRR Driver and accordingly the respondents are directed to revise his pension and gratuity and pay all the pensionary benefits to which he is entitled on such revision. This exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The OA is disposed of accordingly with the aforesaid directions.'2. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute.The 1st respondent herein wor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(4)ALD163; 2001(4)ALT215
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ 1. In these writ petitions, the vires of Rule 448-B of Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Rules') framed in exercise of the powers conferred under Sections 28, 38, 95, 96, 107, 111, 138 and 176 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Central Act 59 of 1988) (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') is called in question. An incidental question as regards the correctness or otherwise of a decision of this Court in M. Venkateswara Rao v. Secretary, RTA, : 2000(1)ALT170 , also arises for consideration. 2. While admitting the writ petitions, it was observed that the findings of the learned single Judge in Venkateswara Rao's case (supra) to the effect that a writ ofmandamus would not lie directing the release of the vehicles nor the seizure itself can be declared as illegal as well as the finding that the aggrieved persons have to necessarily file application for release of the vehicle seized and detained by the competent authorit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (2001)171CTR(AP)563; [2001]252ITR269(AP)
S.R. Nayak, J. 1. Writ Petition No. 15098 of 1993 is filed by Mr. K.S.N. Murthy, whereas W. P. No. 15976 of 1993 is filed by Sri K. Appa Rao. It is stated that Mr. K.S.N, Murthy and Mr. K. Appa Rao are partners of the firm, Durga Lorry Transporters. In these two writ petitions, the petitioners have assailed the validity and legality of the Common Order No. 21/W. Ptn./273A/93-94/CIT(c), dated August 10, 1993, of the Commissioner of Income-tax (for short, 'the Commissioner'), Karnataka (Central). Bangalore, the second respondent herein, rejecting the applications of the petitioners made under Section 273A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act', for brevity), for waiver of interest and penalty on the ground that the disclosure of income was made subsequent to a search carried out in the premises of Andhra Cements Limited, Vijayawada, on December 29, 1986. The background facts leading to the filing of these writ petitions be noted briefly as under :The petitioners in these two writ petitio...
Tag this Judgment!