Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-03-1996
Reported in : 1996(3)ALT553
ORDERSyed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. The petitioner in these two writ petitions is a residential educational institution. It challenges the validity of the demand notice claiming property tax in respect of the building in which the school is being run. The demand in W.P. 14122/89 relates to the assessment years 1984-85 to 1988-89 and the demand notice for the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96 is the subject matter of W.P.No. 3282/96.2. As the questions of fact and law in these two writ petitions are common they are heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.3. The petitioner educational institution is run by a trust called /Vasishta Educational Trust' which is a registered trust. It is stated that the building was constructed by contribution from the trustees and by raising funds and obtaining loan. The school started functioning in the year 1981. It is affiliated to the Indian Council of Secondary School Examination, New Delhi; Course prescribed by the said Council ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-09-1996
Reported in : 1997(2)ALT701
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. This C.M.A. and C.R.P. arise out of a common judgment delivered by the second Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The C.M.A. is filed under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act against the order in O.P.No. 4 of 1986. The said O.P. was filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle-III, Nizamabad under Sections and 33 of the Arbitration Act objecting to the Award passed and praying the Court to set aside the award dated 27-9-1985.2. The C.R.P. arises out of the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 1242 of 1985. The suit was filed by the respondent herein under Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act praying the Court to direct the Arbitrators (defendants 3 to 5) to file their award into Court and to make the award the rule of the Court and also to award interest at 18% per annum from the date of the decree.3. The O.P. was dismissed by the learned second Additional Judge, City Civil Court and the suit was dec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-27-1996
Reported in : 1997(2)ALT496
ORDERV. Bhaskara Rao, J.1. This revision petition is filed by the tenant against the decree and order in R.C.A. No. 30/1988 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Rajahmandry, dated 28-8-1981 assailing the eviction order in respect of the petition schedule premises which is let out for a composite purpose of residential and non- residential purposes being contrary to the authority in Dr. Madhusudan Mahuli v. L. Indira Bai, 1987 (2) ALT 504 = 1988 (1) APLJ 159. and ignoring the fact that the landlord/respondent is only a sleeping partner in a firm Viswanadha Traders and no family member ever carried on business at any time.2. The facts giving rise to this revision petition in brief are that the landlord filed R.C.C. No. 63/1981 under Section 10(3)(a)(i) and (iii) of Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, for short the 'Act', on the ground that he has completed his studies and intends to engage himself in whole time business independently as well as in partnership, w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-21-1996
Reported in : 1996(3)ALD970; 1996(2)ALD(Cri)455; 1996(2)ALT(Cri)175; 1997CriLJ10
1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and sentence passed in S.C. No. 164 of 1994 on the file of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Following are the brief facts of the case :- The complainant is a public servant, working under Director General of Revenue, Division, New Delhi. He is authorised to register the case under N.D.P.S. Act, 1995. On 26-3-1994, at about 8 p.m. P.W. 1 on receiving information that some prohibited drugs were being transported in a car from the compound of Pearl Apartments, Shymalal Buildings, Begumpet, assembled along with other officers and panch witnesses at plot No. 2, L.I.C. Colony, Domalguda, and proceeded to Pearl Apartments, Shyamlal Buildings, Begumpet. They reached there at about 11 p.m. They noticed one blue colour Maruthi Car bearing No AP-9-E 1799, parked inside the compound of the Pearl Apartments. They noticed at about 1.30 a.m. the accused coming towards the car and taking out the keys of the car. He was stopped by the raid party and o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-11-1996
Reported in : 1996(3)ALT215
M.N. Rao, J.1. The question for our decision in this writ petition, referred to a Division Bench by our learned brother C.V.N. Sastry, J., on the ground that it involves an important question, is: whether Section 102 Cr.P.C, empowers a Police Officer to freeze the bank account of a person suspected to be involved in the commission of an offence?2. The first petitioner is the husband of the second petitioner. They are intimately associated with a firm by name Matchless Travel Bureau, Hyderabad. Petitioner No. 1 is the Executive Director and the second petitioner, his wife, is one of the partners. The firm is an approved agent of I.A.T.A. (International Air Transport Association). It is stated that all the Airlines extend credit facilities to the approved agents. The firm's main business is to book air tickets to foreign countries.3. Petitioners 1 and 2 are figuring as A-2 and A-4 in Crime No. 170/95 of the Saidabad Police Station, Hyderabad registered Under Sections 465, 471 and 420 of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-01-1996
Reported in : 1996(2)ALT47
ORDERC.V.N. Sastri, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner questions the legality and validity of the order dated 5-6-1987 reducing him to the rank of Junior Lecturer from the post of Principal in the 3rd respondent junior college, which was confirmed by the State Government by its order dated 30-1-89. The facts leading to the writ petition may be stated briefly.2. The petitioner was appointed as Principal of A.V.S. Jr. College, Pulletikurru, East Godavari District which is a private institution recognised and aided by the State Government, in the year 1974. In the year 1983, the petitioner was issued with a show cause notice by the Management of the college alleging certain irregularities and calling for his explanation. After he submitted his explanation to the show cause notice, a retired Subordinate Judge was appointed as Enquiry Officer to conduct an enquiry into the allegations against the petitioner.3. The petitioner was placed under suspension by an order dated 11-11-1983 p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-12-1996
Reported in : 1997(2)ALT193
ORDERY. Bhaskar Rao, J.1. That batch of Writ Petitions is filed assailing the constitutional validity of Rule 3 read with Rule 5 of A.P. Factories Rules and the amendment of the Schedule under Rule 5 vide G.O. Ms. No. 154 dated 26-7-1994 increasing the licence fee payable under Rule 7(3) for obtaining licence and renewal of licence for the factories.2. The petitioners herein are the licencees of the factories in this State. They obtained licence under the Factories Act (the Act), 1948 by paying requisite fee upto 1987. The maximum licence fee levied was Rs. 10,000/- basing on the installation of Horse Power (H.P.) and man power, In the year 1994 the Schedule to Rule 5 was amended and there was a change in the slab system. The new slab system starts with 7,500 H.P. installation with 10,000 workers. The maximum installation of H.P. is 3 lakhs and above and the maximum man power is over and above 20,000. The maximum fee fixed is Rs. 18 lakhs. In the new schedule there is an increase of li...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-20-1996
Reported in : [1997]89CompCas270(AP)
T.N.C. Rangarajan, J.1. This petition seeks a declaration that the forfeiture of the shares held by the petitioners in the first respondent company by a notice published in the Deccan Chronicle, dated January 11, 1996, is void and that the petitioners continued to be the holders of the shares. 2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the company floated a public issue of 33 lakhs equity shares of Rs. 10 each and since the company was sick at that time the petitioners applied for the allotment of those shares and also paid the initial application money upon which 21,15,400 shares were allotted to the petitioners. It is stated that the share certificates were issued endorsed as fully paid-up and some of them were also transferred by the petitioners. In the meanwhile, cheques issued by the first and ninth petitioners bounced. Thereafter, notices of forfeiture of the shares were sent by the company on December 2, 1995, which were not received by petitioners No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-20-1996
Reported in : [1997]223ITR713(AP); [1997]93TAXMAN310(AP)
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri J.1. In these four writ petitions, the constitutional validity of section 115J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is questioned. As the question raised in these writ petitions is common, they were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. For appreciating the contentions raised in these writ petitions, we would refer to the facts in Writ Petition No. 8060 of 1992. 2. The first petitioner in this writ petition is a public limited company which is registered under the Companies Act, 1956. The second petitioner is one of the equity shareholders of the first petitioner-company. It is stated that under the provisions of the Companies Act, the petitioner is required to prepare the balance-sheet and the profit and loss account in accordance with Schedule VI to the said Act. For the financial year 1989-90, i.e., April 1, 1989, to March 31, 1990, the petitioner disclosed Rs. 65,52,925 as the net profit. The petitioner filed income-tax returns for the sai...
Tag this Judgment!