Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(1)ALD330; 2001(6)ALT728
S.R. Nayak, J. 1. The 1st petitioner is a Public Limited Company registeredunder the Companies Act, 1956, of which the 2nd petitioner is the Managing Director, engaged in the business of manufactureand sale of cement. The petitioner has established a cement factory at Mellacheruvu in Nalgonda District with capacity to manufacture 2 lakh tonnes of cement per annum. The raw material required for manufacture of cement is limestone. Therefore, the petitioner-company in order to operate its cement plant has taken 350 acres of limestone mines on lease basis from the Government of Andhra Pradesh in the year 1986 and a deed of lease was executed on 24-4-1986. Among other terms and conditions, the said lease provides for payment of interest at 24% per annum on the amount due and payable to the Government.2. The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Nalgonda, the 3rd respondent herein, has issued a demand notice dated 1-9-1998 to the Managing Director of the petitioner-company directing the c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(1)ALT620
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. In all these writ petitions, the principal issue which has fallen for consideration before us is whether the Registering Authority under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') can insist for production of Tax Clearance Certificate obtained from the Commercial Tax Department at the time of registration of vehicles. Since a common issue is raised in all these writ petitions, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. These petitioners are purchasers of various types of vehicles from outside the State of Andhra Pradesh. When such vehicles are brought within the territory of the State of Andhra Pradesh, as provided under Section 39 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the owners of the vehicles are required to register them with the concerned Registering Authorities in order to ply the vehicles on any public place or in any other place. It is the case of these petitioners, when these vehicles are purchased and brought to the State of Andhra Prades...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(5)ALT8
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against an order dated 22-8-1990 made in E.A.No. 18 of 1990 in O.S.No. 50 of 1974 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Razole.2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows: While taking execution for delivery of possession of the petition schedule property, delivery warrant was issued and however the delivery could not be effected since there was some obstruction and application for taking steps had been filed and it was ordered that the property should be delivered on 17-4-1990 and on that day the delivery warrant was returned unexecuted stating that one K. Pullaiah and his family members had obstructed the delivery on the ground that they had purchased these properties by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 14-5-1981 from the judgment debtors, the respondents 2 and 3 in the present revision. The third party objector who is the present revision petitioner also had filed a memo stating that he is not a par...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1983]53CompCas73(AP)
Alladi Kuppuswami, C.J.1. These appeals are directed against the judgment of our learned brother, Chennakesav Reddy J., dismissing Company Petitions Nos. 10 and 12 of 1980. 2. C.P. No. 10/1980 was filed by two shareholders of the Andhra Bank Ltd. under ss. 433 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956, praying for the winding-up of the company and for other consequential reliefs. C.P. No. 12/1980 is a petition filed under ss. 397 and 398 of the Companies Act on the ground that the affairs of the company are being conducted in a manner oppressive to some of the members of the company including the petitioners and other members set out in the schedule to the petition, and on the ground that the company was being mismanaged. They prayed that this court might regulate the conduct of the company's affairs by reconstituting the board of directors and providing safeguards for the future, and for other reliefs, or in the alternative to direct a payment of Rs. 610 per share to the dissenting sharehold...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1990AP203
ORDER1. Two citizens of India viz., P. Innaiah and Lt. Col. C. T. Subiya the petitioners are calling in question the Foreigners (Report to Police) Order, 1971 (in short the 'Order') issued under S. 3 of the Foreigners Act (XXXI of 1946) as amended from time to time (in short the 'Act') on the ground that the Order is ultra vires the powers under S. 3 of the Act and and that it also infringes their Fundamental Rights.2. With a view to appreciate these conten-tip.ns it is necessary to state few facts. The petitioners claim to be the Chairman and Executive Director of the Rayalaseema Development Trust, Anantapur said to have been registered under the Societies Registration Act. They state that their Trust undertakes Projects relating to Community Health, Vocational Training, Drought Relief, Ecology Children's Education, Economic Development etc. in Rayalaseema area in Andhra Pradesh. They receive contributions from Foreign Agencies regulated under the Provisions of Foreigners Contribution...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP94
Seshachelapathi, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in O. S. No. 67 of 1953 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Masulipatam. The suit was brought by Koneru Survanarayana and Vemulapalli Subbayya (respondents 1 and 2 in the present appeal) on behalf of all the owners of the lands covered by patta No. 50 of Bobberlanka village, claiming possession of an extent of 32 acres of land marked in the colour yellow in the plan attached to the plaint on the ground that the said land was a lateral accretion to their pre-existing lands situate in an island in the Krishna river. The 1st defendant to the action is the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Collector, Krishna, The 7th defendant is the Field Labour Co-operative Society, Kokkoligadda permitted by the 1st defendant to occupy whole or portions of the disputed land. Defendants 2 to 6 are office-bearers of the said Co-operative society.2. The plaintiffs arc all residents of the Bobberlanka village. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1983AP166
Kodandaramayya, J. 1. This civil Revision petition is referred for decision of a Division Bench by our learned brother Rama Rao, J. The question referred is whether a second Appeal lies to this Court against the appellate order passed on an application under O. 21 R. 58 C.P.C 2. The petitioner herein filed an application under O. 21 r. 58 C.P.C before the subordinate judge Narasaraopet, to raise the attachment in respect of petition schedule properties challenging the attachment effected at the instance of the 1st respondet-decree- holder who had obtained a decree against the 2nd respondent-Judgment-debtor. The contention of the petitioner is that the execution proceedings in respect of the petition schedule properties are illegal as the property belongs to him and not to the judgment-debtor. At present was are not concerned with the merits of the case and is enough if we notice that the object of the petitioner was overruled by the executing Court. A civil Miscellaneous appeal was fil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1988]70STC232(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The A.P. General Sales Tax (Amendment) Act (19 of 1986) introduced a new entry, 129-A, in the First Schedule to the Act. The First Schedule specifies the goods under various entries in respect of which single point tax is leviable under section 5(2)(a). Entry 129-A reads as follows : ------------------------------------------------------------------------Sl. No. Description of goods Point of levy Rate of tax------------------------------------------------------------------------'129-A Articles of processed food At the point 6 paise inother than those specifically of first sale the rupee.'mentioned elsewhere) prepared in the State.wholly or mainly from flour ofgram, cereals, pulses or oilseeds.------------------------------------------------------------------------ This entry was introduced with effect from 1st June, 1986, the date on which it was introduced into the schedule by a notification issued by the State Government in exercise of its power under section ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1985AP96
P.A. Choudary, J. 1. W.A. No.377/82; This writ appeal is filed against a judgment of our learned brother, Jeevan Reddy, J. The appellant in this writ appeal is the Senior Administrative and Accounts Officer, Atomic Minerals Division, Department of Atomic Energy, who is one of the respondents to the writ petition (hereinafter he will be called as the appellant also.) The appellant has a branch office at Hyderabad and it is housed in a rented building No.1-11-200 Begumpet, Hyderabad. That building belongs to one E.P.B. Manian (hereinafter referred to also as 'the writ petitioner'). That building was requisitioned by the State Govt., (another respondent to the writ petition) from the writ petitioner some time back, and allotted to the appellant under the provisions of the A.P.Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act 1960 (hereinafter referred to also as 'the Rent Control Act'). Since then the appellant has been occupying that building. While building is under the occupation of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALD547; 1998(6)ALT540
ORDER1. The petitioner, CSR Estates Flat Owners' Welfare Association, Kothapet, Ranga Reddy District, has filed this writ petition for a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of respondent No.) i.e., Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, in granting modification in building permission vide proceedings No.696/P4/H/94datcd2-l-1988, in favour of respondent No.3, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law. By the impugned proceedings, the respondent No. 1 has permitted certain modifications and alterations in the original sanctioned plan dated 19-7-1991 in favour of the respondent No-3, who is a builder. This action of respondent No.l is now being challenged by the petitioners' Association.2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition it is alleged by the petitioners' Association that it is a registered Association under the Societies Registration Act and the petitioners' association consists of all the flat owners residing in t...
Tag this Judgment!