Andhra Pradesh Court November 1990 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Shyam Rao Vs. Land Acquisition Officer (Spl.) Cum-dy. Collector Singoo ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP219; 1991(1)ALT176
ORDERJagannadha Rao, J.1. The appellant Shyam Rao has preferred this writ appeal questioning the judgment of the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 16600/86 dated 5-7-1990 in so far as the learned Judge did not direct the respondents to deposit in Court the compen-sation of Rs. 1,74,756-94. That sum, according to the appellant, represents the compensation payable in respect of the land which is in dispute between the appellant and the respondents 2 to 7.2. The notification was issued under S. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 16-10-1980 followed by a declaration under S. 6. In the award enquiry the appellant initially filed a claim petition on 12-8-81 laying claim to certain items covered by the notification. Subsequently, however, the appellant filed a second claim petition on 18-9-1986 claiming 50% of the compensation payable, claiming that the property is joint family property. The contesting respondents also filed a similar claim on 20-9-1986 cl...
Mohammed Khan Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP213; 1991(1)ALT644
ORDERJagannadha Rao, J.1. These three writ petitions are connected and can be disposed of together. In W.P. No. 11427/89 there is a single petitioner-Mohd. Khan. In W.P. No. 6960 of 1989, the petitioner is the State Motor Transport Operators Association. In W.P. No. 977 of 1990, the petitioner is M/ s. Hyderabad Local Lorry Owners Union. All the petitioners are impugning the validity of G.O. Ms. No. 122, Transport, Roads and Buildings (Tr. II) Department dated 30-3-1988 in so far as it insists upon the persons having a valid registeration certificate under the provisions of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961. The Motor Transport workers Act, 1961 is an Act to provide for the welfare of motor transport workers and to regulate the conditions of their work. S. 3 of that Act provides for registration of motor transport undertakings. S. 2(g) defines motor transport undertaking. The said Act as stated in S. 1(4) applies to every motor transport undertaking employing five or more motor tra...
Mohd. Khaja Qureshi Vs. Abdul Rahman and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT111
Immaneni Panduranga Rao, J.1. These two Second Appeals arise out of O.S. No. 115/82 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Tandur filed by the respondents for recovery of arrears of rent for the period from March, 1982 to September, 1982 and O.S No. 108/83 on the file of the same Court for possession of the suit premises and areas of rent from October 1982 to August, 1983 and for future mesne profits.2. The case of the plaintiffs is that the defendant has taken on rent an open plot measuring 175 X 125 feet in S. No. 131 of Tandur for establishing petrol bunk of Indian Oil Corporation and has committed default in payment of rent; that by virtue of a compromise entered into between the parties on 1-5-1989 the defendant agreed to pay an additional amount of Rs. 175/- per month towards rent for establishing a stone polishing machine and has committed default in payment of rent. It is alleged in O.S. No. 108 of 1983 that in the earlier suit the defendant filed the written statement den...
M. Narayana @ Narayanamurthy and ors. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT154
Jagannadha Rao, J.1. This is an appeal against the Judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition.2. The facts of the case are as follows: A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was published in the West Godavari District Gazette on 25-4-1987. In the said notification it was stated that the lands were required for providing house-sites to Schedule Castes and Back-ward Classes. According to the respondents authorities, local publication of the substance of the said notification was made on 27-4-1987. It is not in dispute that the notification was also published in the local newspapers as provided under Section 4(1) of the Act, as amended by Act 68 of 1984, on 15-6-1987. The writ petition itself was filed on 22-6-1987. It was stated that the writ petitioners (appellants) are small farmers and that there was no publication of the substance of Section 4(1) notification in the locality either by beat of tom-tom...
Gangupati Savitramma and anr. Vs. Katuri Ramadevi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT453
ORDEREswara Prasad, J.1. In this revision, the petitioners question the order of the Court below, in impleading all the persons claiming to be the Legal Representatives of the deceased-second defendant in the suit, without determining as to who are the Legal Representatives of the deceased.2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that Order 22 Rule 5 CPC is mandatory and the Court is bound to decide the question as to who are the Legal Representatives of the deceased party when a dispute is raised and that the decision on such a dispute cannot be postponed to the later date. The Court below observed that all the persons claiming to be the Legal Representatives can be impleaded without prejudice to their respective contentions. It is further observed by the Lower Court that there will be no executable decree that can be passed in favour of the deceased-second defendant. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that certain amounts were paid to the plaintiff towards me...
Dileep Damodaran Vs. Govt. of A.P. Rep. by Its Secretary to Govt. Educ ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP194; 1991(1)ALT207
ORDERSardar Ali Khan, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions the common prayer is that the respondents should be directed, by a writ of mandamus, to implement Rule 9(4) of the rules issued in G.O. Ms. No. 62, Education (Rules), dated 10th February, 1989 and to admit the petitioners into the Medical, Engineering or Agricultural Course, as the case may be, for the academic year 1990-91, subject to eligibility and merit, under thecategory of 'Children of Ex-Service and Defence Pesonnel.'2. The basic question that arises for consideration in this batch of writ petitions is the rule of reservation of 4% for the children of ex-servicement and defence personnel, including the children of Border Security Force and the Central Reserve Police Force residing in Andhra Pradesh. It may be mentioned here itself that the above said rule is in conflict with the several other rules made by the different Universities fixing 1% reservation for the children of ex-servicemen and defence personnel, issued in ...
The Canara Bank (a Govt. of India Undertaking) Rep. by Its Chairman an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT446
Sardar Ali Khan, J.1. This Writ Appeal is directed against the order dated 17-4-1990 passed in W.P. No. 18327 of 1989 allowing the writ petition and setting aside the impugned proceedings issued by the appellant-Canara Bank appointing an Enquiry Officer to inquire into the charges framed against the responden1 herein, by the erstwhile Lakshmi Commercial Bank Limited.2. The respondent was an employee of M/s. Lakshmi Commercial Bank Ltd., which had merged with the Canara Bank in terms of a scheme of amalgamation dated August 23, 1985. formulated by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India. A charge sheet dated May 4, 1985 was issued to the respondent herein by the Lakshmi Commercial Bank Limited containing several charges of grave financial irregularities and mismanagement on the part of the respondent herein when he was functioning as Branch Manager in the said Lakshmi Commercial Bank Ltd. However, before the enquiry could be completed against the petitioner, the scheme of amalgamat...
Attili Narayana Rao Vs. State of A.P., Rep. by District Collector Comp ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT400
ORDERRadhakrishna Rao, J.1. This writ petition is filed for the issue of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay enhanced compensation as per the judgment and decree of this court in CMA No. 1077 of 87 dated 26th July, 1989.2. The Arbitrator-cum-District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam passed an award dated 10-3-1987 fixing the compensation at Rs. 15/- per Sq. Yard for the lands acquired under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immoveable Property Act, 1952 ('the Act' for brevity). Being dissatisfied with the said Award of compensation, the claimant filed CMA No. 1077 of 1987 in this court and a learned single judge of this court allowed the appeal in part and enhanced the compensation to Rs. 20/- per sq. yard. After the said Judgment of this Court, the claimant approached the Competent Authority, along with the decree and Judgment of this Court for payment of enhanced compensation. As the Competent Authority failed to pay the amount as fixed by this court in the above...
Kumaraswamy Vs. Smt. Gangu Bai
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-1990
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT420
M. Jagannadha Rao, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit is filed by the appellant for a declaration that he is the owner and possessor of the suit schedule properties and for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, Smt. Gangubai from interfering with his possession over the suit properties. The suit was filed in 1977. The trial Court by judgment dated 22-12-1981 dismissed the suit holding that the adoption of the plaintiff by late Sayakka has not been properly proved inasmuch as there is no proof of authority granted to Sayakka by her husband. The Court also held that the defendant-respondent is in possession of the suit lands along with Sayakka and that the plaintiff is not entitled to an injunction. On these findings the suit was dismissed. The learned single Judge by his judgment dated 13-9-1988 has affirmed these findings and dismissed the appeal. It is against this judgment that the present Letters Patent Appeal is preferred by the plaintiff.2. The following facts...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›