Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-12-1996
Reported in : [1997]105STC421(AP)
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. A Common question is argued in the writ petition as well as in the tax revision cases, therefore they are being disposed of by a common judgment. 2. The petitioners in the writ petition seek a declaration that section 2(n) read with explanation IV, sections 5 and 5-E of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, 'the APGST Act') are ultra vires the Constitution of India and the legislative competence of the Andhra Pradesh Legislature in so far as they seek to levy tax on the amounts received on the transfer of the right to use the software and the consequential relief restraining the respondents from taking any steps in furtherance of the impugned provision and also directing the respondents to withdraw the levy among other consequential reliefs. 3. There are two petitioners in the writ petition. The first petitioner is an association of 238 software and service companies, the list of which is enclosed to the writ petition, and the second...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-23-1996
Reported in : 1996(3)ALT100
B.K. Somasekhara, J. 1. In a suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale in favour of first respondent depended upon in O.S.No. 85 of 1982 which was decreed by the learned Sub-Judge, Khammam on 25-4-1987 which was confirmed by the Additional District Judge, Khammam in A.S.No. 24 of 1987 dated 30-12-1988 has resulted in this second appeal raising the following substantial questions of law.2. Non-compliance of mandatory requirement in a suit for specific performance; to plead readiness and willingness to perform the part of the contract by the plaintiff is fatal to the suit and in this case when that was not done in addition to want of proof, the learned Judges of the Courts below were totally beyond the legal fore to spell their findings and the decisions.3. When the claim petition filed by the plaintiff under Order 21 Rule 58 of C.P.C. in regard to the property covered by the agreement which was under attachment in the Execution proceedings filed by defendant No. 2 came to be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-29-1996
Reported in : AIR1996AP371; 1996(1)ALT600
ORDER1. There is conflict of perception of a problem, the problem of dealing with stray dogs in the twin Cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad and remedial measures to be adopted to solve that problem, between an individual and a public authority and this conflict is carried to this Court for consideration and resolution by way of this writ petition, styled as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner is one J. Gopalan. He claims to be an Engineer by profession and he is a permanent resident of Hyderabad for the past 30 years. The petitioner has stated that he has filed this PIL to espouse the cause of the residents of the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad.2. The Respondent No. 1 is the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, for short 'the Corporation'; the second respondent is Smt. Rachel Chatterjee who was the Commissioner of the Corporation at the relevant time and the third respondent is Blue Cross represented by its Chair-Person Smt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-26-1996
Reported in : 1998(2)ALD158; 1998(2)ALT569
ORDERC.V.N. Sastri, J. 1. This is an appeal filed by the wife questioning the decree of annulment of marriage granted by the lower court under Section 12(1) (c) and (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the application filed by the respondent-husband. The respondent filed the application for annulment of marriage on the ground that the appellant was suffering from a disease known as 'Hyper Prolactinemia with Galloctorrhea' in medical parlance with symptoms like continuous lactation of milk from her breasts and irregular menstruation due to which she is incapable of bearing children and that his consent for the marriage was obtained by fraud and wilful suppression of the said facts.2. The respondent is an Engineer employed in the Thermal Power Station at Paloncha in Khammam District. The case of the respondent as set out in the Original Petition filed by him and as it appears from his evidence as PW1 is as follows :The marriage of the respondent with the appellant took place on 8-2-1989 at G...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-09-1996
Reported in : 1997(2)ALT701
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. This C.M.A. and C.R.P. arise out of a common judgment delivered by the second Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The C.M.A. is filed under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act against the order in O.P.No. 4 of 1986. The said O.P. was filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle-III, Nizamabad under Sections and 33 of the Arbitration Act objecting to the Award passed and praying the Court to set aside the award dated 27-9-1985.2. The C.R.P. arises out of the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 1242 of 1985. The suit was filed by the respondent herein under Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act praying the Court to direct the Arbitrators (defendants 3 to 5) to file their award into Court and to make the award the rule of the Court and also to award interest at 18% per annum from the date of the decree.3. The O.P. was dismissed by the learned second Additional Judge, City Civil Court and the suit was dec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-02-1996
Reported in : 1996(4)ALT951
ORDERLingaraja Rath, J.1. All these cases arise out of a common order passed by Subordinate Judge, Tadepalligudem relating to an award passed by the arbitrator on the claims preferred by the appellant in C.M.A. No. 1854 of 1989. The appellant and the respondent State in that appeal are referred to, for the sake of convenience, in the present judgment as the appellant and the respondent.2. The appellant undertook the contract of widening and strengthening the carriage way K.M. 79.50 to K.M. 111.50 of V.V. Road. In the execution of the work dispute arose between the parties which was referred to an arbitrator who submitted his award on 3-10-1987. The appellant had preferred nine items of claims and interest on each item. The arbitrator allowed claim items 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 for various sums but rejected claim items 5, 7, 8 and 9. He also awarded interest at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of entering upon the reference i.e., 28-4-1985 till the date of decree or payment. The appella...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-03-1996
Reported in : 1997(1)ALT152
ORDERB.K. Somasekhara, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a common judgment by the learned Additional Chief Judge-cum-II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in O.S. No. 833 of 1978 and O.S. No. 53 of 1981 dated 29-9-1982. CC.CA. No. 28 of 1983 arises out of O.S. No. 833 of 1978 whereas C.C.C.A. No. 40 of 1983 arises out of O.S. No. 53 of 1981. In both the cases, the appellant is common. The two suits are between the close relatives and almost between the same parties. It maybe necessary to note the admitted relationship between them. One Safdar Hussain, Meharunnisa Begum @ Bismilla Bai and Badrunnisa Begum @ Badar Bai and Khamarunnisa are the uterine brother and sisters of one Bibijohn. Khamarunnisa and Badrunnisa, the two sisters died issueless without leaving any surviving husband behind them. Meharunnisa died in the year 1967 at Ujjain whereas Badrunnisa Begum died on 30-8-1978 in the Osmania General Hospital Hyderabad. Nayyar Bai and Fazal Hussain @ Afsar Hussain are...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-09-1996
Reported in : 1997(2)ALT761
ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J.1. These writ petitions are disposed of by a common judgment as the issue involved is common to all the writ petitions.2. The petitioners in W.P. No. 16957/96 are bona fide purchasers of plots made in Acs. 9.00 of land situated in Survey No. 91 of Bowenpally Village, Rangareddy District known as 'Vadlavani Bhavi'. The said Vadlavani Bhavi was plotted out in the year 1970 after obtaining permission from the Gram Panchayat. The purchases were made between 27-11-1993 to 23-5-1996. The first petitioner is the Society known as 'Shiva Enclave Welfare Society'. The second petitioner is one of the members of the Society. The Vendors of the petitioners are the Legal Representatives of Sri Mustafa Shareif, Sri Veera Reddy and Malla Reddy respondents 6 to 11. At the time of purchase of these plots there were temporary structures in various plots. After purchasing the plots, 35 of them have constructed their houses. They have obtained electricty connection, telephone connectio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-06-1996
Reported in : 1996(4)ALT649
ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J.1. This writ petition is filed for a declaration declaring the action of respondents 1 to 3 in appointing respondents 5 and 6 as professors in Cardiothoracic Surgery and Anaesthesiology vide proceedings No. 1/165/ Acad/95 dated 22-2-95 as illegal, arbitrary, void, etc.2. It is not necessary to consider the case of the second (sic. sixth) respondent as she is no longer continuing as Professor in the first respondent Institution.3. The petitioner is the Honorary Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery at the first respondent Institute. The petitioner is challenging the appointment of fifth respondent as Professor in the first respondent Institute. According to the petitioner for the purpose of appointment as Professor, a person should have the qualifications included in the I or II schedule or Part-II of the third schedule to the Indian Medical Council Act of 1956 and a Post Graduate qualification Ex. MD/MS or a recognised qualification equivalent in the respective disci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-19-1996
Reported in : 1996(4)ALT602
ORDERG. Bikshapathy, J.1. The question that falls for consideration in both the Writ Petitions is whether the Employee can take the assistance of a co-employee and whether Clause 521 (10) (a) of Sastry Award is constitutionally valid. As common questions of law are involved, both the Writ Petitions are dealt with jointly.2. Before delving into the legal aspect, it is necessary to trace out certain individual facts. The petitioner in W.P.No.7524 of 1992 was appointed as Messenger in the State Bank of Hyderabad, Machilipatnam in 1985. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under the provisions of the Sastry Award and Desai Award. During the course of enquiry, the petitioner sought the assistance of one Sri R. Shyam Sunder, an employee working in the Bank. The Enquiry Officer rejected the said assistance interpreting the provisions of Clause 521 (10) (a) of Sastry Award read with Paragraph 18-28 of Desai Award which state that the employee shall be permitted to be ...
Tag this Judgment!