Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-11-1973
Reported in : AIR1975AP138
Ekbote, C.J.1. The nationalisation of transport in a part of the Andhra Pradesh State had a chequered career. It is unnecessary to go into the history of the ups and downs of the various attempts made to nationalise. It is enough to say that in all 218 schemes were published, 133 of them were published on 15-11-1972 in the State Gazette. The other 85 were published on 10-4-1973. Objections were invited from the existing operators and others against the schemes so published. iN 40 schemes no objections whatsoever were filed. In regard to 178 schemes, however, objections were filed mostly by the existing operators. The Home Secretary, who was duly authorised to hear and enquire into objections commenced the hearing on 31-7-1973 and concluded the same on 14-8-1973.2. On a consideration of the proposed schemes in the light of objections that were filed, the Home Secretary approved 35 schemes on 3-9-1973. Out of them 32 schemes as approved were published in the Gazette on 15-11-1972. The re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-23-1973
Reported in : 1974CriLJ1069
Chennakesav Reddy, J.1. The murder in this case is one of the common types as old and primeval as the sound of surf on the rocks at the sun-set murder due to sexual jealousy.2. The locale of this tragic incident is a private nursing home of one Dr. Janardhana Reddy (P. W. 5) in a town in Cuddapah district called Rayachoti and evidently populated by a lively mixture of Hindus and Muslims. It happened on the morning of 11-9-1971 at about 10-45 A. M. The victim, Ameenabi, is an young married woman of 25 years with two daughters, P. Ws. 2 and 4 in the case, aged 11 years and 7 years respectively. The accused an equally young man of about 23 years had a romantic interest in the deceased woman. Her husband P.W. 7 was employed as a peon in the local library.3. The accused and the deceased lived in the same locality known as Kothapalli in Rayachoti town. They were neighbours. P.W. 7 suspected his wife's illicit intimacy with the accused and shifted his residence to another locality known as Ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-16-1973
Reported in : AIR1973AP315
Gopal Rao Ekbote, C.J. 1. This appeal is from the judgment of our learned brother M. Krishna Rao, J., given in W. P. No. 1579 of 1970 on 3-3-1972 whereby the learned Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned notice.2. The facts in outline are that the petitioner-Company has a number of mines wherein building stones and limestone are extracted. One of such mines is Kaidgira lime stone mine situated in the District of Hyderabad. The said mine is an open cast quarry. It is engaged in extraction of building stones and lime stones.3. The Joint Director of Mines Safety issued the impugned notice under Section 22(1) of the Mines Act directing the petitioner-company to appoint a qualified Mines Manager under Section 17 of the Act. The petitioner-company submitted its explanation on 1-4-1970 contending inter alia that the provisions, except those mentioned in Section 3, are not applicable and as a result, the Joint Director cannot ask the petitioner-company to appoint a Manager a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-20-1973
Reported in : AIR1974AP55
Gopal Rao Ekbote, C.J.1. This batch of writ petitions raised common questions. They can therefore be dispossed of by a common order.2. The facts lie in a narrow compass and are not in all in dispute.3. On 12-4-1972 the Collector, Hyderabad District nominated in all 120 businessman for allotment of fair price shops to be opened by them in twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad. The said persons were directed to deposit Rs. 1,000/- each in the form of National Savings Certificates and to execute agreements and to complete other formalities.4. The petitioners are some of the persons who were nominated as above by the Collector. They deposited Rupees 1,000/- each, executed agreements, obtained licences and are alleged to have taken mulgies on rent for opening the shops. Some clerks are also alleged to have been engaged by some of them. Ration cards were, however, not registered. The Government had not given their consent nor approved of them for the purpose of allotting sugar quota to t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-06-1973
Reported in : [1976]102ITR834(AP)
Kondaiah, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, has, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, submitted under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), a statement of case for our opinion on the following question : 'Whether, on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, the penalty imposed under Section 28(1)(c) had been validly cancelled ?'2. In order to appreciate the scope of the question, it is necessary to briefly refer to the material facts found by the Appellate Tribunal. The assessee, an individual doing contract business, had purchased a house in May, 1951, for a sum of Rs. 29,500 in the name of his minor son. For the assessment year 1952-53, the relevant accounting year being the financial year ending with March 31, 1952, one of the questions that fell for consideration before the Income-tax Officer in the assessment of the assessee's income was whether the assessee had explained the source of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-09-1973
Reported in : AIR1973AP264
Gopal Rao Ekbote, C.J.1. Pothina Vari Kunta a fresh water tank is situated in the hamlet of Daggupadu viz., Pothinavaripalem. It has been in existence from times immemorial and has been serving the needs of the villagers. The tank is endowed with 13 acres and 16 cents of land for the repairs and up-keep of the tank. The tank and the endowed property have been from the inception under the care and management of the trustees. The trustees used to derive income from the land and utilise the same for maintaining the tank in proper condition. The defendants are now the trustees and are in possession of the land and are charged with the obligation of maintaining the tank in repairs out of the income of the land. The trustees have been deriving income from the land but have not spent anything on repairs of the tank. They have been utilising the income for themselves. They are partitioning the property. They are also now trying to alienate the property as though it is their own. The tank is no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-26-1973
Reported in : (1974)IILLJ353AP
Obul Reddy, J.1. These two writ petitions filed by employees of the Andhra Pradesh Mining Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation), raising a common question, are directed against the orders of the Corporation terminating the services of the petitioners. The common question involved is whether the action of the Corporation, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, in terminating the services of the petitioners is an act of 'the State' so as to entitle the petitioners to seek a writ of mandamus or any other appropriated writ or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The facts necessary for determination of the question involved are these : The petitioner in W.P. No. 1457 of 1971 is a first class diploma-holder in ceramics having obtained the same in the year 1947 from the School of Arts and Crafts, Madras. He joined in the Industries Department of the Government of Madras first as Supervisor and was later promoted to the Gazetted cadre as Superinte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-10-1973
Reported in : AIR1974AP43
Ekbote, C.J. 1. This appeal is from the judgment of our learned brother O. Chinnappa Reddy , J. given in W.P. No. 2163 of 1972 on 11-10-1972 whereby the learned judge dismissed the Writ petition. It arises in the following circumstances. The petitioner holds a stage carriage permit to his vehicle plying on the route Cuddapah to Tirupati. He had a bus APD 1669 for which he held the said permit. It appears that the original permit was granted some time in 1955 and since then the permit was renewed without any objection till 1970 every three years. A fresh application for renewal was filed in 1970 with the Regional Transport Authority. It was published inviting objections , if any, for such renewal.2. The 4th respondent herein filed objections under Section 57(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act objecting to the renewal of permit. He seems to have entered into an agreement with the appellant for the purchase of the bus APD 1669. It is also alleged that in pursuance of the agreement possession of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-18-1973
Reported in : AIR1974AP220
1. Judgment debtor is the appellant in this second appeal. The facts giving rise to this appeal are the following :2. A money decree was passed against the appellant and another person in O.S. 12 of 1957 on the file of District Munsifs Court, Eluru for Rs. 1,716/- in favour of the first respondent and the predecessor in interest of the respondents 2 and 3. The decree-holders filed E.P. 292 of 1959 on 29-10-1959, for attachment of the movable properties. The movable were attached. In E.A. 442/70 by an order dated 18-4-1960 movables were directed to be sold without any reference to the upset price. But on 30-6-1960 E.P. 292 of 1959 was dismissed. Later on the other decree-holder i.e., the predecessor in interest of respondents 2 and 3 died. Thereupon respondents 1 to 3 filed E.P. 160 of 1963 on 24-6-1963 for sale of the attached movable properties. Notice to the judgment debtor was ordered but for non-payment of batta the said E.P. was dismissed on 12-8-1963.3. Thereafter the decree-hold...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-24-1973
Reported in : AIR1974AP258
Gopal Rao Ekbote, C.J. 1. This batch of cases raises a point regarding the construction of Rule 212 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules in its relation to Section 47(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.2. Facts do not matter much because any answer to the question referred to us does not depend upon the facts of any of these cases. The learned Judges who have referred the main case to us thought that 'there is conflict of views between Division Benches of this Court as to the scope and application of R. 212 of the Motor vehicles Rules vis-a-vis Section 47(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act'. Although the order of reference does not expressly say as to on what point there is a conflict, on a reading of the whole order or reference the learned Judges seem to take the view that the opinion expressed in C. Narasa Reddy v. Government of Andhra Pradesh (1970-2 Andh WR 20) by Chinnappa Reddy, J. accords with the view taken by the learned Judges who referred the case and which they had expressed in ...
Tag this Judgment!