Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-23-2004
Reported in : 2004(5)ALD807; 2004(5)ALT755
1. The judicial somersault for a decade in the hands of the Division Benches and the Full Bench and the decisional upheavals inherent in the system continue to make the litigant under the perennial predicament and speculation. This is one such instance, we are called upon to clear the riddles.2. The matter is brought before us on a reference made by a learned Single Judge (BPRJ) in regard to the decision rendered by the Full Bench of this Court reported in Motichand Jain v. Jaikumar M, : AIR2004AP136 (FB).3. The issue that arises for consideration is(a) Whether A.P. Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 30 of 1989 is retrospective or prospective in operation?(b) Whether there is any distinction between vested right and right to forum? 4. The Andhra Pradesh Civil Court Act, 1972 was brought into statute book with effect from 1.11.1972. The pecuniary jurisdiction of Courts both original and appellate and as also the forum are being amended from time to time. By A.P. Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-04-2004
Reported in : 2004(4)ALD582; 2004(2)ALT792
Bilal Nazki, J.1. Two suits being O.S.No. 8 of 1983 and O.S.No. 300 of 1982 on the file of the Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad have been decided by a common judgment on 24.4.1986. One Iqbal Singh was defendant in O.S.No. 8 of 1983 and plaintiff in O.S.No. 300 of 1982. He has filed these two appeals against the common judgment of the trial Court. During the pendency of these appeals he died and his son-2nd appellant was brought on record as his legal representative. The parties will hereinafter be referred to as they are arrayed in O.S.No. 8 of 1983.2. The subject matter of both the suits related to an extent of 1000 sq. yards (975 sq. yards) of open land in premises bearing No. 5-9-96 (corresponding to old number as B-1-89 or B-1-96) on the public garden road, Nampally, Hyderabad. O.S.No. 8 of 1983 was a suit filed by the plaintiffs seeking possession of 1000 sq. yards in premises bearing No. 5-9-96. They also claimed mesne profits for three years amounting to Rs.36,000/...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-01-2004
Reported in : 2005(3)ALD66; 2005(2)ALT494
Elipe Dharma Rao, J. 1. Aggrieved of the judgment and decree dated 25.4.2001 passed in AS No. 106 of 1995 by the learned III Member, Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings-cum-VIII Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 7.3.1995 passed in OS. No. 453 of 1987 by the learned VI Asst. Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, the unsuccessful defendants, all through, filed this Second Appeal; whereas, CRP No. 1485 of 2001 was filed by the defendants in the suit aggrieved of the orders dated 28.2.2001 passed in I.A. No. 22 of 2001 in AS No. 106 of 1995 by the learned lower appellate court allowing the petition filed under Order 41 Rule 27 admitting additional evidence subject to proof, relevancy and admissibility. Likewise, CRP No. 1486 of 2001 was filed by the defendants in the suit aggrieved of the orders dated 12.2.2001 passed in I.A. No. 6 of 2001 in AS No. 106 of 1995 by the learned lower appellate court dismissing t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-08-2004
Reported in : AIR2005AP54; 2004(4)ALT389
Bilal Nazki, J.1. Wakf Board filed a suit being O.S. No. 61 of 1980 for declaration and possession of the suit schedule property. It sought eviction of defendants 1 to 17 and also claimed mesne profits. It also sought a decree for permanent injunction. It also sought injunction against Municipality-defendant No.5 not to pay compensation for lands acquired during the road widening. Defendants 1 to 4 in O.S. No. 61 of 1980 filed another suit being O.S. No. 156 of 1975 which was later numbered as O.S. No. 137 of 1978 seeking injunction against the Wakf Board. Both the suits were clubbed together and decided by a common judgment. O.S. No. 61 of 1980 filed by Wakf Board was dismissed, whereas O.S. No. 137 of 1978 filed by the defendants was decreed in part. The Wakf Board filed two appeals being AS No. 2348 of 1987 and Tr. AS No. 1171 of 1990. Tr. AS No. 1026 of 1991 has been filed by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 137 of 1978. Since all these three appeals arise out of the same judgment of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-30-2004
Reported in : 2004(3)ALD474; 2004(3)ALT417
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. In this second round of litigation the constitutional validity of Section 12-A of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (Act No. 7 of 1964) (for short 'the Act') as substituted by Act No. 16 of 2003 is once again challenged and put in issue. The attack is based upon more or less similar grounds that were raised in the previous round of litigation that resulted in the decision in M. Krishnama Naidu and Ors. v. State of A.P., : 2003(5)ALD516 (DB).Factual backdrop:2. The petitioners herein are mainly aggrieved by the action of the respondents in proposing to transfer the assets or assets and liabilities of the co-operative sugar factories in question, in whole or in part, to any other society or person, etc. The orders passed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Andhra Pradesh under Section 12-A(1) of the Act in purported public interest are challenged; and so also the consequential proceedings about which we shall refer in detail hereinafter....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-20-2004
Reported in : 2004(5)ALD717; 2004(6)ALT354
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. All the petitioners are private educational institutions in the Districts of Chittoor, Kadapa and Nellore. They were affiliated temporarily to Sri Venkateswara University (the University, for short) since the date of establishment of respective colleges. For the academic year 2004-05, however, the University informed the petitioners that extension of temporary conditional affiliation is not granted and that the question of granting further affiliation would be considered after the colleges shift to own buildings. The colleges were directed not to make admissions to first year courses during the academic year 2004-05. The communication from the Registrar of University dated 24.06.2004 is challenged by all the colleges on various grounds.Background facts2. Taking the Writ Petition No. 10974 of 2004 as illustrative case, facts may be noticed in brief. The petitioner college obtained permission under Section 20 of A.P. Education Act, 1982 (the Education Act, for brevity) i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-03-2004
Reported in : (2008)11VST887(AP)
Bilal Nazki, J.1. The petitioner is a registered dealer engaged in purchase and sale of laminated sheets. He is an assessee for the purpose of sales tax. The petitioner's assessments were being made every year under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereafter referred to as 'the State Act' and 'the Central Act', as the case may be). According to the petitioner, he has been paying taxes on the sale turnovers registered in the books of account and disclosed to the department in the monthly returns. The laminated sheets were also liable to tax at the rate of 12 per cent in terms of the relevant entry No. 17A of the Sixth Schedule to the Act which provides levy of tax at every point of sale. The laminated sheets were not liable to tax at the point of purchase. The petitioner submitted that he effected inter-State purchases of laminated sheets from one M/s. Durban Ltd., in Gujarat and inter-State purchase was covered by rel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-07-2004
Reported in : AIR2004AP283; 2004(1)ALD724; 2004(3)ALT536
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. This common order shall dispose of all the six writ petitions as grounds urged in support of the writ petitions in the light of the provisions of A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (hereinafter called 'the act') and in the background of reconstruction scheme for Charminar Co-operative Bank Limited ('bank' for brevity) formulated by Government of Andhra Pradesh (hereafter called 'GoAP') in accordance with Section 115-B of the Act are same. The Respondents, GoAP and Bank, represented by its Administrator filed common counters in all the writ petitions and it would be expedient to deal with factual as well as legal issues together. Be it noted, the cases came to be filed challenging certificates for recovery of loan amount (petitioners call them Award) of different dates issued by fourth respondent and seeking to quash them by writ of certiorari. As the amounts borrowed by various petitioners (proprietary concerns) are different and for different business purpose...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-09-2004
Reported in : 2005(1)ALD205
G. Bikshapathy, J.1. All the matters are placed before the Division Bench for answering the references made by the learned Brother P.S. Narayana, J. The issues arise under the provisions of A.P. (A.A) Tenancy Act, 1956 (hereinafter called the 'Act').2. The circumstances leading to the reference as spelt out from the Order of reference of the learned Judge are briefly narrated hereunder.3. The revision petitioners are the landlords and the respondents are the tenants. The tenants filed petitions before the Special Officer, Guntur for a declaration that they are the cultivating tenants and consequential relief of perpetual injunction restraining the landlords from interfering with the possession over the petition schedule lands. The original authority allowed the applications of the tenants as prayed for. Aggrieved by the said Order of the original authority, they filed appeals before the Appellate Authority District Judge, Guntur. The learned Appellate Authority also dismissed the appea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-09-2004
Reported in : AIR2004AP250; 2004(2)ALD451; 2004(2)ALT546
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The common question of law that arises for consideration in these matters is:'Whether the claimants are entitled to payment of compensation under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') when the assigned lands are resumed by the Government for a public purpose ?'2. A Full Bench of this Court is State of A.P. v. P. Peda Chinnayya, : 1997(1)ALT498 (FB), held:'Where the Government resorts to the provisions of the Act for acquisition of the patta lands without resorting to the terms of the grant for resumption, it is liable to pay compensation under the Act, but such compensation will be only the market value of the interest of the owner or the assignee of the land, subject to the clog. In such cases of acquisition, the claimant would also be entitled to consequential reliefs, such as those of solatium and interest etc., under the Act. In a case where the patta lands are resumed by the Government, the assignees cannot claim compensati...
Tag this Judgment!