Andhra Pradesh Court January 1991 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.
Special Deputy Collector (industries) Vs. Bee Man Bi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)ALT526
Jagannadha Rao, J.C.C.C. A. 164 of 1982 1. These to appeals are connected and can be disposed of together.2. C.C.C.A. No. 164/82 is an appeal preferred by the Special Deputy Collector, Industries, Hyderabad against the judgment and decree passed in O.P. No. 268 of 1979 on 8-2-1982 under the Land Acquisition Act. The judgment was given by the Court below on a reference u/s. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The notification in question u/s. 4(1) was issued on 9-6-1977 acquiring an extent of Acs. 21. 28 guntas in S. No. 24/A of Bowen-pally village. The acquisition was made for the purpose of R&D; Department B.H.E.L. Possession was taken on 18-3-1978 and the award was passed on 28-6-1978. Thereupon, a reference was claimed under Section 18 and was registered in the Civil Court as O.P. No. 268 of 1979 referred to above. While the Larid Acquisition Officer granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 4/- per sq. yard, the Civil Court enhanced the same to Rs. 10/-. Against the said decree, the clai...
Soni @ Bhuthulasi and ors. Vs. Kunda Nageswara Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-1991
Reported in: 1991(3)ALT200
Jagannadha Rao, J.1. These revisions have been referred to a Division Bench by our learned brother Lakshmana Rao, J. The point that arises for decision is whether a third-party who disputes the title of the landlord filing the eviction petition, could seek to get impleaded under Order 1, Rule 10 (2) C.P.C. and seek an adjudication on the question of title. A. division Bench of this Court consisting of Jayachandra Reddy, J (as he then was) and Immaneni Panduranga Rao, J, in G. Manikyamma v. T. Seetharamaiah, 1988 (2) ALT 333 = 1988 (1) L.S. 39 has held that the third-party raising a dispute as to title could be impleaded under Order 1, Rule 10(2) C.P.C. because, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure apply to proceedings before the Rent Controller. However, Muktadar, J. in Sitarama Rao v. Ratanlal Panwar, 1982 (1) An.W.R. 276 and T.L.N. Reddy, J in Kotamma v. Kotilingam Chetty, 1983(1) ALT 41 observed that the Rent Controller cannot decide complicated questions of title and a sim...
T. Vasanthamma Vs. Pattan Usman Saheb
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT294
ORDERImmaneni Panduranga Rao, J.1. The short question that falls for consideration in this revision petition preferred by the decree-holder is whether the executing court has got jurisdiction to direct payment of the decretal amount in instalments in an execution petition filed for arrest of the judgment-debtor.2. The petitioner herein obtained a decree for Rs. 23,000/- against the respondent-judgment debtor and filed E.P.No. 79 of 1990 for arrest of the judgment debtor alleging that as an employee in A.P.S.R.T.C. he is drawing a salary of Rs. 1,500/- per month but is evading to pay the amount. The judgment debtor came forward with an untenable defence that the decree-holder has accepted to receive the decree amount in instalments of Rs. 100/- per month from November, 1989 ; that he has accordingly paid the instalments of Rs. 100/- per month till February, 1990 and that thereafter, the decree-holder refused to receive the instalments. He has also stated that he has to maintain a big fa...
Media Anasuyamma and Another Vs. Choppela Lakshmamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-29-1991
Reported in: AIR1992AP183; 1991(1)ALT430
ORDERJagannadha Rao, J.1. This revi-sion has been referred to a Division Bench by one of us (Eswara Prasad, J), inasmuch as the correctness of the decision of Radhakrishna Rao, J. in A. Chandrasekhar v. R. Narasimha Reddy(1990) 1 Andh LT 264 was questioned before the learned Judge. The point relates to the retrospectivity of the Andhra Pradesh Stamp (Amendment) Act, 1986 (Act. 17/ 1986). Incidentally, the correctness of the decision of Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.in K. Obaiah v. T. Venkatamma, (1988) 2 Andh LT 435 : (AIR 1989 NOC 174) as to what is a 'case decided' also has arisen.2. The petitioners in the revision are the defendants in O. S. No. 156 of 1981. The 1st defendant is the daughter of one Subbaiah. The plaintiff is the sister of Subbaiah. The plaintiff claimed the suit property under a registered settlement deed dated 25-8-1974. The 1st defendant contended that Subbaiah executed a registered settlement deed dated 23-5-1979 in her favour. The plaintiff's suit is for declarat...
Polagani Venkaiah Vs. Katta Chinnamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT549; II(1991)DMC340
N.D. Patnaik, J.1. On a report given by the petitioner the police have registered a case against the accused Under Sections 306, 323 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) of the Dowry Prohibition Act and after investigation of the case, charge sheet was filed. Thereafter the case was committed to the Court of Session for trial and the same is pending trial in Sessions Case No. 91/87. Not being satisfied with that, the petitioner has filed a private complaint against the same accused under Sections 302, 498A 34 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code. That case was also committed to the Court of Session and the same is pending trial in Sessions Case No. 52 of 1989 Both the cases were clubbed and trial is pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Eluru.2. While so, the petitioner who is the complainant, filed Crl M P No 2301/90 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge for permission to cross-examine the prosecution witness. That application was dismissed. Against th...
G. Srinivasa Reddy, Secunderabad and Others Vs. the Municipal Corporat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1991
Reported in: AIR1992AP45
ORDER1. In these writ petitions, notification dated 11-9-1987 issued by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, ihe third respondent, under S. 3(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Slum Improvement (Acquisition of Land) Act, ActNo. XXXIII of 1956 (for short 'the Act') are challenged. W. P. Nos. 16075, 17100 and 4890 of 1987 relate to acquisition ofthe slum known as 'Gangidi Yellareddy Compound' (for short 'G. Y. Compound'), Zeera, Secunderabad. W. P. Nos. 15330, 16202 and 17889 of 1987 relate to acquisition of the slum known as Unnikota, Kavadiguda. As the facts in all the W.Ps. are common, it would be sufficient to refer to the facts as stated in the affidavit accompanying W.P. No. 16075/87.2. The petitioners in the said writ petition are claiming to be owners of houses bearing Municipal Number 6-6-252 to 254, Zeera, Secunderabad on the basis of the partition deed dated 1-7-72. According to them, the houses in question are their ancestral properties. They are paying municipal taxes assessed on t...
The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. and anr. Vs. Rami Reddi Rama Devi and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT686
ORDERJagannadha Rao , J.1. The claimants in this case are the widow and the mother of the deceased. A sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- was claimed, but a sum of Rs. 1,59,000/-plus costs plus interest was awarded. The learned counsel for the appellant, however, tried to challenge the correctness of deduction of Rs. 300/- per month out of the monthly income of Rs. 1,000/- the said deduction having been made towards the personal expenses of the deceased. The learned counsel wanted some guidelines to be laid down uniformly for all cases and placed reliance on the decisions reported in Smt. Manjushri Raha v. B.L. Gupta, : [1977]2SCR944 , Madhya Pradesh State Road Trans port Corporation v. Sudhakar, AIR 1977 SC 1189 and Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Shafiya Khatoon, 1985 ACJ 149 (F.B.) In our view no guidelines which are of a uniform nature can be laid down so far as deduction in respect of personal expenses of a deceased are concerned. The question would depend upon the facts and ...
The Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Makireddi Appalan ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT677
ORDERJagannadha Rao, J.1. In this case, the facts are that the deceased person was travelling in a goods vehicle for here or reward. The court below passed an award in favour of the claimants in a sum of Rs. 58,000/- with costs and interest. The claimants were the husband of the deceased and four minor children.2. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company, Sri Kota Subba Rao has contended that in view of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Oriental Fire & General Assurance Company v. M. Bhanumati, 1990 (1) ALT 685 rendered by Amareswari and Neeladri Rao, JJ., there is no liability on the part of the Insurance Company under Sections 94, 95 (1) (b) and 96 (2) (b) (i) and (c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. We are not however deciding as to what is the position under the new Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.3. The above decision of the Division Bench is binding on us and therefore we are unable to release any amount in favour of the claimants. However, it appears that by an int...
Reena Ranka Vs. Union of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT678; 1991CriLJ3195
Ramanujulu Naidu, J.1. This is a petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondent to produce before this Court the petitioner's husband, Basant Kumar Ranka, hereinafter referred to as 'the detenu' and to set him at liberty after quashing the order dated 26-10-1990 passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under S. 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' directing his detention in the Central Prison, Madras. The order of detention reads that it was made with a view to preventing the detenu from engaging in keeping smuggled goods and dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than by engaging in transporting or concealing smuggled goods. 2. The relevant facts giving rise to the order of preventive detention lie in a narrow compass and may be briefly stated. On 23-10-1990 at...
Durgam Mangamma Vs. P. Mohan and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT269
ORDERIyyapu Panduranga Rao, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 6-12-1988 of the learned III Additional District Judge, Chittoor at Tirupati appointing a Commissioner in I.A. No. 642 of 1988 in A.S. No. 47 of 1987 on his file. The facts which are relevant for appreciation of the point in question are the following :2. The revision petitioner is the respondent in the appeal, respondent in I.A. No. 642 of 1988 and plaintiff in the suit while the respondents in the revision petition are the appellants in the appeal, petitioners in I.A. No. 642 of 1988 and the defendants in the suit. The parties will; be referred to as arrayed in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for a declaration and injunction alleging that the second defendant who is the wife of the first defendant without any manner of right or title to the suit property are trying to occupy the same about four days prior to the institution of the suit. The defendants resisted the suit alleging that the second d...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »