Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1996(1)ALT299
ORDERP. Ramakrishnam Raju, J. 1. The first petitioner is the minor son of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 who is studying 5th class. On 11-1-1994 he came into contact with a live overhead 11000 Volts high voltage electric line passing adjacent to their neighbour's house, the second respondent herein, due to which he suffered severe burns. He was admitted into CDR Hospital immediately, but on account of those burns elbow of the right hand and below knee of the right leg were amputated. The building in which the accident occurred was in existence for over a decade and the H.T. Line in question was installed about one and half years back. The requirement relating to installation of overhead lines is set out in Chapter VIII of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 framed under, Section 37 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 80 of the said Rules prescribes that the horizontal clearance between the nearest conductor and any part of the building shall be at least 1.2 metres or 48'....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Common Judgment: These two appeals though arising out of different accidents where the claimants were subjected to different disabilities, the question of law which arises for consideration being common, the learned counsel for the appellants and the respondents requested for hearing these two matters together as both the learned counsel are appearing for both the parties. The appeal viz., CMA No. 4594 of 2004 is filed by the Insurance Company against the award of the Commissioner in W.C.No. 28 of 2003 dated 16.10.2004 whereas the appeal viz., CMA No. 4719 of 2003 also preferred by the Insurance Company against the award in W.C. No. 86 of 2002 dated 29.10.2002. These appeals are hereinafter referred to as ‘first and second case’ respectively for convenience. In the first case, the claimant who was a driver of an auto suffered an accident, which ultimately resulted in loss of vision of his right eye. The said claimant was employed by opposite party No. 1 and the vehicle admi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
COMMON ORDER: 1. C.A.No.1691 of 2011 is filed by M/s Naturol Bioenergy Limited (hereinafter called as ‘NBL’) to issue and publish notices for convening, holding and conducting of meetings of the creditors for approval of the proposed scheme of arrangement, and for the immediate implementation of the package. This Court, by order in C.A.No.1691 of 2011 dated 21.11.2011, directed that a meeting of the secured creditors of NBL be convened on 24.12.2011 at 10.30 A.M. at their registered office for the purpose of considering the reworked CDR Package, and for implementation of the MRA with NBL. Sri Ch.Pushyam Kiran, an Advocate of this Court, was appointed as the Chairman of the meeting. This Court also directed that notice be given to each creditor, and an advertisement be published in “Business Standard” (English daily) Mumbai and Hyderabad editions and “Andhra Prabha” (Telugu daily) Hyderabad edition. In its order dated 22.11.2011 this Court noted the a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Ramesh Ranganathan, J. This petition is filed seeking review of the order passed in W.P. No.35413 of 2013 dated 23.06.2014. The petitioners herein filed W.P.No.35413 of 2013 seeking a writ of mandamus to set aside the order passed, by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad, in S.A. No.97 of 2009 dated 20.09.2009. S.A. No.97 of 2009 was filed by the petitioners herein, under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short the SARFAESI Act ?), to set aside the proceedings initiated by the 2nd respondent-bank herein, under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, against the scheduled property as void, illegal and arbitrary; to direct the 2nd respondent-bank to give a valid discharge of the liability over the scheduled property; and to deliver the documents/execute a sale deed in favour of the petitioners. In its order, in S.A. No.97 of 2009 dated 20.09.2013, the Debts Recovery Tribunal observed that the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1958AP16
Subba Rao, C.J.1. The question in this reference is whether the two petitioners who were discharged fromservice by a single order could file one petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The two petitioners were supervisors of the Market Committee, Guntur. The Government of Andhra, by their order bearing No. 87298/N/56/2, dated 11-10-1956, gave instructions to the Collector, who is the ex-pfficio Chairman of the Guntur Market Committee, to disband the additional staff immediately. Pursuant to the said instructions, the Guntur Market Committee discharged the two petitioners from service by order bearing R. C. No. 1280/, 56 A2 dated 26-10-1956.Thereafter, both the petitioners jointly filed a single petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order terminating their services. On the answer to the question whether the petitioners could file one petition in the aforesaid circumstances depends the question of court-fee for, if one petition is not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1983]53CompCas729(AP)
Ramachandra Rao, J. 1. The common question that arises for consideration in these four company petitions is, whether the company, Shree Farm Chemicals Private Ltd., should be ordered to be compulsorily wound up or whether sanction should be accorded for the compromise or arrangement proposed by the said company in Company Application No. 142/78. As common questions arise in all these four applications, they are heard together and disposed of by a common order. 2. The relevant facts are as follows : Shree Farm Chemical Private Ltd. (hereinafter called 'SFC') was incorporated on January 18, 1975, under the Companies Act, 1956, with an authorised capital of Rs. 5,00,000. The paid up capital is Rs. 3,60,000 divided into 3,600 shares of Rs. 100 each and the shares are fully paid up. The main object of SFC is to manufacture and sell insecticides and pesticides. SFC commenced business of manufacturing and selling of insecticides and pesticides ever since its incorporation. It has set up three...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(2)ALD375; 2007(2)ALT303
ORDERG.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. The above noted writ petitions are being disposed of by a common order because the issues raised therein are inter-related.2. We shall first notice the facts, which have been culled out from the pleadings and documents of the parties. The same are as under:(1) Sri Kaikusroo, son of Shapurji Irani, resident of House No. 1/17, Kazipet, Warangal District filed a declaration under Section 6(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, 'the 1976 Act') on 24-8-1976 declaring the following lands:Village Survey Nos Extent in Extent inAc.gts. Hectares.Kadipikonda 64,70, 25.18 10,2992 or71,72,73 1,02,992 Sq.mtrs.(2) After holding inquiry, Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Warangal (hereinafter described as 'the Special Officer') prepared a draft statement under Section 8(4) of the 1976 Act. On 28-6-1985, the Special Officer issued final statement under Section 9, the relevant extracts of which read as under:1. Details of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (1989)77CTR(AP)40; [1989]178ITR31(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.(1) The constitutional validity of sections 44AC and 206C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is challenged in this batch of writ petitions. These two sections were inserted by the Finance Act, 1988. Section 206C was given effect to on and from June 1, 1988, and section 44AC from April 1, 1989. These two sections read as follows : 206C Profit and gains farm the business of trading in alcoholic liquor, forest produce scrap etc., - (1) Every person, being a seller referred to in section 44AC shall, at the time of debiting of the amount payable by the buyer referred to in that section to the account of the buyer or at the time of receipt of such amount from the said buyer in cash or by the issue of a cheque or draft or by any the mode, whichever is earlier, collect from the buyer of any goods of the nature specified in column (2) of the Table below a sum equal to the percentage, specified in the corresponding entry in column (3) of the said Table, of such amounts as income-tax on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1960AP1
Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. The Revision petitioner was charged before the Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, for an offence of murder under Section 302. Indian Penal Code, and robbery under Section 392, Indian Penal Code, but was acquitted of both those charges. While thus acquitting the accused, the Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of an offence under Section 411, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced her to two yeara rigorous imprisonment. The accused filed a fail appeal against this conviction and sentence, which came up for hearing before our brother Sanjeeva Row Navudu, J., who set aside the conviction and sentence and remanded the case to the Court of Sessions, Visakhapatnam, for retrial on the charges already framed by the said Court at the trial of the petitioner, viz., under Sections. 302 and 392, Indian Penal Code, with the following observations :'After having carefully thought over the merits of the case, the evidence for the prosecution as well as the statements of the appellant...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(1)ALD639
ORDER1. All the three writ petitions can be disposed of by a common order as the common questions of law arise in all these matters.2. The important question that falls for consideration in all these writ petitions are(1) the power and jurisdiction of the State Government to withhold permission for starting the Engineering Colleges after the clearance is given by the All India Council for Technical Education under the provisions of All India Council of Technical Education Act, 1987 and(2) whether Section 20 of A.P. Education Act is repugnant to or overlaps over the provisions of All India Council of Technical Education Act, 1987.3. Before delving into the legal issues, it is necessary to trace out certain facts ineach case for proper appreciation of the matter. Writ Petition No.27598/1997 is filed by the management of J,B. Educational Society, a registered body seeking writ of mandamus declaring that the petitioner is entitled to commence and conduct the degree courses in Engineering a...
Tag this Judgment!