Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1965AP457
Venkatesam, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Anantapur, in O. S. No. 8 of 1958. The facts necessary for the determination of the questions arising in this case are as follows : - The plaintiff J. Kuppanna Chetty, Ambati Ramayya Chetty and Company of Kadiri, is a firm carrying on business as groundnut and mundy merchants. They took on lease a groundnut decorticating factory at Kadiri, known by the name of Vittal Seshappa Chetty Sons, Groundnut Factory. The factory was under the management of one of the partners, Kuppanna Chetty. Vittan Subbayya Chetty, son of Seshayya Chetty was in arrears of Income-tax relating to the year 1951-52 and 1952-53 to the extent of Rs. 20,921-10-0 and Rs. 9,035-4-0, respectively. The Income-tax Officer issued a certificate under S. 46 (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, to the Collector of Bellary for realisation of the said arrears. The Tahsildar, Kadiri, was directed by the Collector to attach the said facto...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2006AP182; 2006(2)ALT1
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The Petitioner filed O.S.No.20 of 2000 in the Court of the learned Senior Civil judge, at Bodhan, against the respondent, for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. She pleaded that she is the daughter of the respondent. In his written-statement, the respondent disputed the very relationship, apart from denying the other allegations, made by the petitioner. The trial Court framed an independent issue, touching upon the relationship. The petitioner filed I.A.No.233 of 2005 for reframing of the said issue. The application was resisted by the respondent. Through order dt.5-10-2005, the learned Senior Civil Judge dismissed the application. Hence, this revision2. Sri Balraj Bodhankar, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue, which was framed by the trial Court, is in such a form, that it would require the petitioner herein to prove the negative. He contends that since the denial, which gave rise to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1992(3)ALT1
ORDERM.N. Rao, J.1. This judgment will dispose of all the six writ petitions since they raise common questions for decision. When the writ petitions were filed, the petitioners were either Chairmen of Zilla Praja Parishads or Presidents of Mandala Praja Parishads. Except the Chairman of the Rangareddy Zilla Parishad, the term of office of the other petitioners has expired. The challenge in the writ petitions, was originally confined to the legality of (1) G.O.Ms. No. 164, Panchayati Raj and Rural Development Department (Mandals-I) dated 8-3-90 by which a rule was made under Sub-section (1) of Section 92 and Sub-section (6) of Section 28 of the Mandala Praja Parishads, Zilla Praja Parishads and Zilla Abhivrudhi Sameeksha Mandals Act, 1986 (MPP & ZPP Act for short) and (2) G.O.Ms. No. 303, General Administration (Services-A) Department dt. 17-4-90, by which, the District Selection Committee for recruitment to the posts both in Government Departments and Panchayat Raj Bodies in the distri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1983AP96
ORDER1. N. T. Ramarao, the wellknown Telegu film star has recently formed a political party called 'Telegu Desam'. The avowed objective of this party as it can be gathered from the material papers filed in this case is to promote the all-rounded development of the Telugu people. With that objective in view, the Telugu desam decided to contest the state Assembly elections. For that purpose it applied to the Election commission of India New Delhi, for the allotment of an election symbol. No individual either on his own or as a candidate of a political party can contest elections to the parliament or to the state Legislatures without the contestant's name appearing on hte ballot paper. But in a largely illiterate country like ours, where voters can neither read nor write, appearance of a candiate's name on ballot paper would not help to ascertain the preference of the illiterate voter. Voters' preferences can only be shown through their choice of election symbols. The possession of a symb...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(1)ALD792; 2002(1)ALT131
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard all the parties.2. The Programme Manager of the petitioner - Society has preferred the writ petition to declare the action of the Government of India in issuing the impugned letter No.J 170-11/40 dated 13-3-1997 and all consequential orders and actions as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 (for short 'the Act') and the Rules made thereunder, and to set aside the same.3. It is useful to notice the averments made in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the writ petition, which are summarised hereunder.Various creek, canal, esturies, backwaters and rivers in the coast are lifeline of the fisherfolk providing not just a means of transport, but supporting micro organisms, marine biological sources and birds that are dependent on each other and live in harmony. Being rich and productive habitats, they attract variety of organisms. Mangroves forests are found in inter-tidal regions including the estuaries, which serve as shoreline stabiliser...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1988AP317
Anjaneyulu, J.1. The State Government of Andhra Pradesh anti the concerned Officers, are the appellants in sill the Writ Appeals. Cross-objections in Writ Appeals Nos. 1419, 1421 and 1423 are filed by the petitioners in Writ Petitions Nos. 11104, 10482 and 10479/86 respectively Writ Petition No.16728/86 is filed by Maankar Trading Company Adoni. It, will be convenient to dispose of all these appeals. Cross-objections and the Writ Petition together, as common questions arise for consideration. 2. The Writ Appeals are filed by the State questioning the correctness of the Judgment and order of our learned brother. Rama Rao J. holding that the directions issued by the State Government, acting under Clause 12(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Schedule Commodities Dealers' (Licensing & Distribution) Order. 11)82 ( for short. the 1982 order) as violative of Articles 19(1)(g) and 301 of the Constitution. 3. The Cross-objections filed by the Writ petitioners above referred question the correctness of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1981AP283
Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. The Parliament, in furtherance of the directive principles enshrined in Article 39(b) of the Constitution of India, enacted the Esso (Acquisition of Undertakings in India) Act, 1974, the Burmah Shell (Acquisition of Undertakings in India) Act, 1976 and the Caltex (Acquisition of Shares of Caltex Oil Refining (India) Ltd. and of the Undertakings in India of Caltex (India) Ltd.) Act, 1977, hereinafter referred to as the Esso Acquisition Act', 'the Burmah Shell Acquisition Act', 'The Caltex Acquisition Act', respectively. The main object underlying each of these Acts is to acquire the right, title and interest of the three major oil companies carrying on in India the business of distributing and marketing petroleum products with a view to subserve the common good. As per some of the provisions which are common to each of these Acts, the right, title and interest of each of the oil companies in relation to its undertaking in India stood transferred and vested in the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1970AP47; 1970CriLJ199
Venkateswara Rao, J. 1. This criminal revision petition, which arises out of a prosecution under Section 135 of the Customs Act and Rule 126-P (2) of the Defence of India Rules, 1962 (Part XII-A Gold Control) has been referred to the Bench by our learned brother, Mohammed Mirza, J., for decision 'in view of the important question of law raised' in the case.2. The factors of the case may briefly be set out here. On receipt of information that Pabbati Bapnaaiah, the petitioner herein, would be leaving Hyderabad for Kothagudem by bus on 3-2-65, with contraband gold, the Deputy Superintendent, Customs and Central Excise, Hyderabad, with some members of his staff, lay in wait at the Gowliguda Bus Dept. in Hyderabad. The petitioner arrived there at 9 A. M. with a holdall in his hand. On a search of his person and belongings, it was found that he concealed in a pillow, four gold slabs with foreign markings 'Johnson Mathey 999-O London 10 tolas'. Those slabs were seized and further investigati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(2)ALD184; 2008(4)ALT189
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the Revenue Divisional Officer/Special Grade Deputy Collector, East Division, Ranga Reddy District, in initiating proceedings for grant of occupancy right certificate in respect of lands in Sy. Nos. 255, 258, 275/A, 292, 293, 299, 300, 301, 305 and 306 of Mamidipally Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in favour of the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board (for short 'Wakf Board') as illegal and arbitrary and to direct the Revenue Divisional Officer not to grant occupancy rights in favour of the Wakf Board or any other institution.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased land in an extent of Ac.2.00 cents in Sy. Nos. 299 and 300 of Mamidipally Village, Saroornagar Mandal, vide registered sale deed dated 4.2.2006 from Smt. Sayeeda Zamrudh Begum W/o. Md. Fayyaz and others. The vendors of the petitioner have been granted occupancy right certificates and mutation was also effected duly recor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(4)ALD388; 2008(1)ALT520
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. Whether a temporary fair price shop dealer falls within the ambit and scope of the expression 'any aggrieved person' used in Clauses 20 and 21 of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System Control Order, 2001 (for short, 'the Control Order') is the question, which has been referred by the Division Bench to the Larger Bench in view of apparently conflicting opinions expressed by the two Division Benches in B. Maheswaramma v. M. Ramasubbamma : 1996(1)ALT274 and judgment dated 19-3-1997 rendered in Writ Appeal No. l 146 of 1995.2. For deciding the aforementioned question, it will be useful to notice the background facts.Writ Appeal No. 1805 of 2005M. Vanaja v. B. Balaseshanna and Ors.3. Respondent No. 1-5. Balaseshanna was appointed as fair price shop dealer of U. Bollavaram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District prior to 1975. On 10-8-2001, his authorisation was suspended by Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal (respondent No. 4) on the allegations that ...
Tag this Judgment!