Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1978AP281
A. Gangadhara Rao, J. 1. The Pioneer Construction Company, the respondent, entered into an agreement on 5-6-1970 with the Superintending Engineer, Nagarjunasagar Canals Circle, Jaggayyapet, for excavation of the balance of the earth work of Munagala deep cut from mile 72/4 to 74/4 of Nagarjunasagar Left Main Canal. Since he did not complete the work in spite of repeated extensions of time, the contract was finally terminated with effect from 30-7-72 under clause 61 of P.S. to A.P.D.S.S. The respondent also requested the department to terminate the contract in his letter dated 18-7-1972. At the instance of the respondent, the matter was referred to the Arbitrator under clause 73 of P.S to A. P. D. S. S. The Arbitrator gave his award on 30-4-1974. It is partly in favour of the respondent. The respondent filed O. S. No. 122 of 1974 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada under S. 14 (2) of the Arbitration Act for directing the Arbitrator , the 4th respondent , to file the award ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1978]115ITR190(AP)
Ramachandra Raju, J. 1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench-A, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee.2. The questions of law which are referred for the opinion of the High Court are :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 93,515 was a revenue receipt liable to tax for the assessment year 1963-64 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 93,515 can be treated as profits and gains of a business under Section 28 of the Income-tax Act, 1961? 3. Without prejudice to the questions Nos. 1 and 2 above, whether the Tribunal is right in holding that the entire amount of Rs. 93,515 was assessable in the assessment year 1963-64, despite the fact that the assessee employed the mercantile system of accountancy ' 3. The assessee is a firm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1980AP78
1. The Appellant is the plaintiff, which is a registered firm dealing in building and sanitary materials. The respondent is the Union of India, represented by the General Manager of the South Central Zone, Indian Railways, Secuderabad. The appellant entrusted 1000 S. W. pipes to the railway on 1-8-1966 at Barang for being carried to Hyderabad. The goods were consigned at Railway risk rate for delivery at Hyderabad. The consignment was loaded in the wagon by the coolies licenced by the Railway Administration. When the goods were delivered at Hyderabad on 26-8-1966 on the appellant paying the freight charges, it was found that 350 S. W. pipes were broken into pieces. The Goods Inspector assessed the damage at 60% at the time of delivery. On 12-9-1966 when the appellant preferred a claim for damages, the claim was rejected by the Railway Administration under its letter dated 29-9-1966 on the ground that the consignment was nor properly packed when it was entrusted to the Railway. The appe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1982]134ITR158(AP)
Madhava Reddy, J. 1. In these writ petitions the validity of r. 19A of the I.T. Rules, 1962, as it stood applicable to the assessment years 1969-70 and 1974-75, is challenged as ultra vires of s. 80J of the I.T. Act, 1961, in so far as it prescribes that in computing the capital employed in an industrial undertaking, (1) the borrowed money and debts due by the assessee should be deducted, (2) that it should be computed as on the 1st day of the previous year, and (3) that it should be assessed at the written down value of the asset after allowing depreciation. These writ petitions can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment. 2. Section 80J of the I.T. Act, in so far as it is relevant for our present purpose, reads as follows: '80J. Deduction in respect of profits and gains from newly established industrial undertakings or ships or hotel business in certain cases. - (1) Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and gains derived from an industrial undertak...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1982CriLJ2020
Seetharama Reddy, J.1. This petition is to release Gutha Narayanappa C. No. 1422 in the Central Prison, Chenchalguda, Hyderabad, by issuing a writ of Habeas Corpus or any other appropriate writ of direction. 2. The petitioner's case is that the convict Gutha Narayanappa was convicted in S.C. No. 28/71 under S. 302, I.P.C. and S. 3 of the Explosive Substance Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and sentenced to life imprisonment for each of the offences, though to run concurrently. Appeal therefrom was, however, dismissed. Prior to the sentence he was under remand for a period of 11 months and 22 days. While undergoing the sentence of life imprisonment, the convict earned remission amounting to three years. The convict has already spent about 10 years in prison. While so, the Government of Andhra Pradesh in commemoration of the 25th anniversary of the formation of the State of Andhra Pradesh and in exercise of its powers under section 432, Cr.P.C. issued G.O. Ms. No. 557 dated 30-10...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1983AP1
ORDER1. This is a petition of issue of writ of mandamus declaring that liquidation proceedings against Kollur parvathi co-operative Bank Limited, is illegal and void by holding that provisions of S. 64 of the A.P. Co-operative that the High Court alone has jurisdiction or in the alternative direct the reserve Bank of India to take steps under sub-cl. (Iii) of S. 115-B of the A.P. Co-operative societies Act, 1964 and by declaring that the Deputy Registrar, Tenali and the registrar of co-operative societies, Hyderabad have no jurisdiction to order liquidation of the Kollur parvathi co-operative Bank ltd.2. The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are as follows: The petitioners are members and depositors of Kollur parvathi co-op. Bamk Ltd. Kolluru, 1st respondent here in. The petitioners 1 to 8 hold the deposits of Rs. 69,000/- Rs. 49,000/- Rupees 90,000/- Rs. 75,000/-, rs. 37,155/-, Rupees 28,000/-, Rs. 35,000/- and Rs. 20,000/- respectively. The 1st responde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (1984)IILLJ140AP
Chennakesav Reddi, J.1. A controversy of considerable interest and public importance is aroused by this Writ Appeal preferred under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of our learned brother Jeevan Reddy, J. It is (a) whether right to employment is a fundamental right guaranteed under Art. 16 of the Constitution and (b) whether past prejudicial conduct and antecedents of a person relating to his subversive political activity prescribed as a disqualification for employment under Government of India in Office Memoranda dated 27th September, 1967 and 1st August, 1975 of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, amounts to an infraction of the provisions of Art. 16 of the Constitution. 2. The controversy in this case grew out of the denial of employment to one Kalluri Vasayya, to a Civil post - a post of Time-Scale Clerk in the Indian Posts and Telegraphs Department, Government of India. Vasayya, a Science Graduate, applied for the post of Time-Scale Clerk in the Ind...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1985CriLJ1446
Rama Rao, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of A-l to A-4. A-l is convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. A2 and A3 are convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. A4 is convicted under Section 302 read with Section 109 IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. Al to A3 are also convicted under Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and sentenced to suffer three years rigorous imprisonment. A5 who was charge-sheeted under Section 201 IPC was acquitted. All the accused were charge-sheeted for having caused the death of one Rami Reddy of Tummalapalli village on 9-8-1980 at 12.45 noon at the house of the deceased in the said village. It is stated that A1 to A3 hurled bombs and A4 armed with spear instigated the accused to attack the deceased. Al to A5 and the deceased and PWs 1 to 5, 7 and 8 belong to the same village. A2 is the uncle of Al, A3 is the 'dayadi' of A2 and A2 a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1985CriLJ1890
ORDERLakshminarayana Reddy, J.1. This application is filed under Section 482 Cr. P.C. praying for cancellation of the parole granted to respondents 2 to 4, who are accused Nos. 1,2 and 4, in crime No. 62/82 of Martur P.S. and SC. No. 9/83. Respondents 2 and 3 are the appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 920/83 and respondent No. 4 is the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 921/83, on the file of this Court. The petitioners are wife and mother of late Kavuri Venkateshwarlu, Bobbepalli, Addanki taluq, Prakasam district. The said Kavuri Venkateshwarlu was murdered in the village on 13-7-1982. Respondents 2 to 4 and 7 others were prosecuted in this matter and four of them were found guilty of the offence under Section 302 IPC in SC. No. 9/83 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam, _and they were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life, the respondents preferred appeals and they are pending in the High Court. The respondents also filed applications to grant bails, pending appeals,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1986AP317
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. The three appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment since they are founded on the same set of fact. The resopndent sued the appellants in O. S. No. 805/84 for delcaration that the demands by the appellants in thier letters Dt. June. 13, 14, 1984 for a sum of Rs. 1,78,89,986-90ps. And Rs. 94,36,000/- towards charges for consumption of electricity and additional deposit for consumption respectively, as illegal void and arbitrary and to restrain the appellants or their subordinates to enforce the said demands. O. S. No. 919/84 was laid for a declaration that the appellants are not entitled to issue bills for monthly consumption charges on the basis of normal tariff and to issue future bills at concessional rates and to restrain the appellants from collecting Rs. 26,94,745-42 ps towards the bills for the month of June 1984. Pending the suits, they filed I. A. No. 1529/84 in O. S. 805/84 which gave rise to C. M. A. No. 638/85 to issue an injunction restraining the a...
Tag this Judgment!