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 : 2007(4)ALD209; 2007(3)ALT287
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. Repeated attempts by the Government of Andhra Pradesh to bring about a unified cadre of teachers in government, mandal parishad and zilla parishad schools have met with little success. The last such effort, prior to Act 27 of 2005, which met its Waterloo was when the Rules, in G.O.Ms. No. 538 dated 20-11-1998, were declared ultravires the Presidential Order and were quashed by the Division Bench of this Court in M. Kesavulu v. State of A.P. : 2003(6)ALD522 Aggrieved by the order of the Division Bench in M. Kesavulu', the A.P. United Teachers Federation filed S.L.P. Nos. 7496-7510 of 2005 and the Supreme Court, by order dated 25-10-2004, stayed the contempt proceedings initiated pursuant to the order of the Division Bench. The State of A.P. also preferred S.L.P. Nos. 22597-22612 22597-22612 of 2004 and, while granting stay of the contempt proceedings, these S.L.Ps. were directed to be tagged along with S.L.P. Nos. 7496-7510 of 2004. All the S.L.Ps. are stil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2007AP179; 2007(4)ALT101
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions, the action of the respondents, requiring the petitioners to surrender the 'basic permits' issued to the respective vehicles, for the purpose of cancellation; is challenged. The impugned action is said to be in pursuance of a circular dated 11-12-2006, issued by the Transport Commissioner, Government of Andhra Pradesh.2. The petitioners are the owners of contract carriages. All of them were issued basic permits in Form P.C. under Section 74 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') read with Rule 174 of the A.P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (for short 'the Rules'). The said permits were issued in pursuance of a policy decision taken by the Government and issued in memo, dated 1-6-1991. These permits enabled the respective owners to obtain special permits under Sub-section (8) of Section 88 of the Act. The Transport Commissioner issued a circular dated 11-12-2006, stating inter alia that Sub-section (8) of Section 88 ha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(3)ALD519
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions, the action of the respondents, requiring the petitioners to surrender the 'basic permits' issued to the respective vehicles, for the purpose of cancellation; is challenged. The impugned action is said to be in pursuance of a circular dated 11-12-2006, issued by the Transport Commissioner, Government of Andhra Pradesh.2. The petitioners are the owners of contract carriages. All of them were issued basic permits in Form-P.C., under Section 74 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') read with Rule 174 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (for short 'the Rules'). The said permits were issued in pursuance of a policy decision taken by the Government and issued in memo, dated 1-6-1991. These permits enabled the respective owners to obtain special permits under Sub-section (8) of Section 88 of the Act. The Transport Commissioner issued a circular dated 11-12-2006, stating inter alia that Sub-section (8) of Section...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(1)ALD548; 2007(6)ALT647
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. This Writ appeal is filed against order dated 14-7-2006 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.14439 of 2006, whereby he dismissed the same in limine.2. The appellant for himself and in his representative capacity on behalf of 203 co-legal heirs of Nawab Nusarath Jung Bahadur-I, filed Writ Petition No.14439 of 2006 seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the tenders called for by the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, 7th respondent herein, (for short 'HUDA') for sale of Ac.100.00 guntas of land situated in Kokapet village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as malafide, arbitrary, malicious, capricious and unconstitutional. The appellant also sought for a declaration that HUDA never had any title to the property in dispute and that their attempt to sell away the same in public auction, without following the due process of law, as null and void. The background facts:3. Late Nawab Nusrat Jung Bahadur-I (for short 'late Nu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(3)ALD136; 2007(3)ALT622
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The revision petitioners are plaintiffs in O.S. No. 161 of 2002 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal. The suit was filed for declaration and for perpetual injunction. The learned Judge framed the point for consideration as hereunder.Whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the present suit.Ultimately, the learned Judge returned the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Code' for the purpose of convenience) with a direction to file the plaint before the Senior Civil Judge's Court having jurisdiction and the intimation of the return of the plaint to be informed to the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs were directed to file an application before the Court to specify the Court in which the plaintiffs propose to present the plaint after its return.2. Sri T.P. Acharya, learned Counsel representing the appellants would submit that the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religiou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(4)ALT25
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Ippili Appalanarasaiah Patnaik, second respondent in the civil miscellaneous appeal Auction purchaser, filed C.M.A.M.P. No. 1978 of 2006, to vacate the interim stay granted by this Court in C.M.A.M.P. No. 814 of 2006 in C.M.A. No. 410 of 2006. The Counsel on record advanced their submissions in elaboration in the civil miscellaneous appeal and made a request for disposal of the civil miscellaneous appeal itself.2. Sri Taddi Nageswara Rao, learned Counsel representing the appellant in the C.M.A., Varanasi Lakshmi, the third judgment debtor made the following submissions.The learned Counsel would submit that the appellant as petitioner filed an application E.A. No. 29 of 2003 in E.P. No. 16 of 2001 in O.S. No. 6 of 1999 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Rajam, under Order XXI Rule 90 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Code' for the purpose of convenience) to set aside the sale of E.P. schedule buildings held on 30-1-2003 on the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1993AP76
ORDERV. Sivaraman Nair, J.1. This Writ Appeal arises from the interim order passed by our learned brother Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J., in W.P. No. 17955/91 in W.P. No/4513/1991. By his order dated 30-10-1991, the learned single Judge directed stay of all further proceedings pursuant to G.O. Ms. No. 957 Revenue (UC.I) Depart-ruent, dated 25th October, 1991. Against the interim order the State has appealed. On its admission on 8-11-1991, the Division Bench directed that the Writ Appeal be posted along with Writ Petition No. 4513/1991. Hence both the matters are before us. In view of the fact that we are hearing the Writ Petition, it is not necessary for us to consider the Writ Appeal separately.2. The Writ Petition is filed on behalf of M.JE.H. the Nizam-VIII, represented by the General Power of Attorney, to call for and quash Government Memo No. 580/ U.C.II(2) / 83-87, Revenue (UC.II) Department, dt. 16-3-1991. Nassar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., filed W.P. No. 14942/91 seeking ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(5)ALD627
ORDERS.B. Sinha, C.J.1. Writ Appeal No. 880 of 2001 is directed against a judgment dated 14-3-2001 passed by a learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 22704 of 2000 wherebyand whereunder the writ petition filed by the appellant was disposed of directing.'Consequently, the respondents are directed to declare the results of the examinations held in July/August, 2000, without insisting that each of the candidates should secure minimum of 50% in internal as well as the external examinations. The results shall be declared on the basis of the aggregate marks secured by each of the candidates in both internal and external examinations.'2. Writ Appeal No. 951 of 2001 is directed against an interim order dated 26-4-2001 passed by a learned single Judge in WP No. 7848 of 2001 directing the respondents therein to promote the students those who have secured 50% marks in internal and external examinations of theory in aggregate to the second year General Nursing Midwifery Course and such promotio...
Tag this Judgment!