Andhra Pradesh Court December 1992 Judgments

Paidipati Dhanamma and ors. Vs. Moutupalli Siva Ram Prasad

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(1)ALT253

A. Gopal Rao, J.1. This appeal is filed against the order of a learned single Judge, upholding the office objection, that the cross-objectors should pay the court-fee on the same value given in the plaint, with respect to the relief of rendering of accounts. The decree of the trial court will disclose that, among other reliers granted to the plaintiff with respect to accounting, the following relief is granted:'That defendants 2 and 3 be and hereby are directed to render true and correct account of Sriramulu's account in the partnership firm, M/s. Motupalli Sreeramulu until 15-12-79 and do pay half of the said amount to the plaintiff with interest at 12% per annum from 15-12-1979.'2. The plaintiff, in the plaint, valued the relief of settlement of accounts at Rs. 55,000/- and paid a court-fee of Rs. 2546/- under Section 33 of the Andhra Pradesh Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (hereinafter called 'the Act') Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, plaintiff filed appeal, A.S. (SR)...

G.L.N. Acharyulu Vs. the Managing Director (Appellate Authority) State ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(1)ALT316

ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. This petition is for a writ of Certiorari, seeking to quash the proceedings of the first respondent Managing Director, dt.20-9-1989, confirming the proceedings of the second respondent dt.30-12-1988, compulsorily retiring the petitioner from the service.2. Though the petitioner has assailed the order impugned on various counts, primarily, without adverting to the merits and demerits of the case, I have taken up to decide the matter only on the question of principles of natural justice, whether the petitioner was given a fair and reasonable opportunity before the final order is passed.3. The case of the petitioner is that he was originally appointed as a Cashier-cum-Godown Keeper in the State Bank of Hyderabad on 4-8-1970 and was directed to report for duty at Jaggayyapet Branch. Later on, the petitioner was promoted as an Officer in the Junior Management Grade Scalei by proceedings No.Per/PF/2762, dt.23-6-1980 and was put on probation for a period of one year...

The Food Corporation of India Rep. by Its Executive Engineer (Civil) V ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT137

1. In this appeal, under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, the appellant challenges the judgment and decree, dated 19th March, 1986, in O.S.No. 1100 of 1983 on the file of the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, as being illegal. The first defendant in the suit is the appellant. The respondent herein filed the suit under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') praying that the Chief Engineer (Retd.) - second defendant therein, (Now it is stated before us by the learned counsel that it is a mistake for first defendant) may be ordered to file the agreement entered into between the plaintiff and the first defendant and to refer the six claims specified therein to the arbitrator already appointed by the first defendant, who was impleaded as second defendant therein. It would be apt to note a few facts leading to the filing of the suit.2. The respondent here in is a contractor undertaking civil works of construction from the Government and sta...

Tarlupadu College of Education Vs. Nagarjuna University, Rep. by Its R ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1993AP218

ORDER1. In this Writ Petition the petitioner Tarlupadu College of Education, seeks a declaration that the refusal to grant affiliation for the year 1990-91 to it by the Nagarjuna University, the 1st respondent herein, conveyed by letter dated 24-4-1991 ofthe University to it, is bad and violative of Article 30(1) of the Constitution.of India and consequently seeks a Writ of Mandamus etc,., directing the University to grant affiliation to it and permit the 160 students admitted by it for 1990-91 in B.Ed, course to sit for the theory and practical examinations to .be conducted from, 21-10-1991, announce itheir results and issue the certificates etc. The following are the undisputed facts: The petitioner-college has not been given any permanent affiliation by the 1st respondent-University though it was set up in 1984. Permission was granted by the Government of Andhra Pradesh for the setting up of a College of Education by the petitioner at Tarlupadu in Prakasam district under G.O. Ms. No...

The Executive Engineer and anr. Vs. C. Raghava Reddy

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT80

V. Sivaraman Nair, J.1. Respondents in Writ Petition No. 9614/1987 which was allowed by judgment dated 3-12-1987 are the appellants before us. The learned single judge directed the present 2nd appellant (2nd respondent in the Writ Petition) not to with hold the amounts payable to the petitioner for the works executed under the agreements other than agreement No. 10/83. The correctness of that decision is under challenge. It is necessary to refer to a brief resume of facts to understand the controversy involved in this appeal. We will refer to parties as they appeared in the Writ Petition.2. Petitioner is a Works Contractor. He has entered into agreement No. 10/83 with the 1st respondent on 5-9-1983 for construction of Masonry Blocks 7 to 14 of Singoor Reservoir project scheme. The Andhra Pradesh Detailed standard specifications formed part of the contract between parties and fells for consideration. The total worth of the contract was Rs. 1,21,59,459/-. That amount was arrived at by ag...

Smt. B. Lalita Devi and ors. Vs. the Special Court Under A.P. Land Gra ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(1)ALT204

ORDERReddeppa Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is for quashing the order dated 22nd September, 1992 in I.A.No. 782/1992 in L.G.C. No. 99/1989 of the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act (for Short 'the Special Court'), I.A. No. 782/1992 was an application under Order 1, Rule 10, C.P.C., filed by the petitioners 1 to 23 and respondents 24 to 28 herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioners'), claiming to be the purchasers of land from respondents-land grabbers in L.G.C.No. 99/1989, to implead themselves as respondents in the said case.2. L.G.C. NO. 99/1989 relates to the Land bearing R.S.No. 54/2 (Survey No. 27/ 1, 2, 3) measuring 7.22 acres situated in Pedda Waltair Revenue village, Visakhapatnam and the same has been filed by the Commissioner of Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (hereinafter called 'the respondent') against 21 persons belonging to 'Duvvu' family before the Special Court. The Special Court at Hyderabad having taken cognizance of the same as L....

M.V.P. Rama Rao and anr. Vs. to Whomsoever It May Concern

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT187

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. The short question that arises in this appeal filed under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short the Act) is: Whether the appellants are entitled to grant of probate under Section 222 of the Act?2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly stated hereunder. The appellants filed O.P.No. 33 of 1986 on the file of the learned District Judge, Rangareddy district at Saroornagar, Hyderabad praying to grant a probate of the will executed by one Rasheed Khana Sri Ramamurthy son of Kamojee Pantulu on 6-3-1985 (marked as Ex.A-1). Under the said will the testator bequeathed his money standing in his name in the Fixed Deposits and Savings Bank Accounts with the State Bank of Hyderabad, Sanathnagar, Industrial Estate Branch, Hyderabad in favour of the second appellant herein and all his movable properties and immovable properties bearing S.R.T.No. 10, Municipal No. 7-2-231, Sanathnagar Colony, Hyderabad and other immovable properties in f...

M/s. Rao's Ladies Centre Vs. G. Prameela

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The allegation of the complainant is that she purchased a Singer Machine and joined in the appellant-institute to learn embroidery work on Singer Machine. But some other machine i.e. grinding machine was given to her for learning. All that she complains is that she ought to have been allotted a Singer Sewing Machine for learning embroidery work. As the appellant has not provided a Singer Sewing Machine, after two days of joining the institute, she left the institute. Then she filed a complaint before the District Forum Hyderabad claiming refund of admission fees of Rs. 60/- and embroidery training fee of Rs. 450/- in all a sum of Rs. 510/-. The District Forum having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case came to the conclusion that leaving of the institute after two days of joining, cannot be due to the reason that the complainant left for Vijaywada but due to other circumstances i.e. not providing her a proper machine. Having regard t...

K. Tagore Vs. Avula Gopal Rao and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. This Revision Petition is filed under Section 17(2)(b) of the Consumers Protection Act, 1986 against the order passed by the District Forum, West Godavary District at Eluru in I-A. No. 48/91 whereby the revision petitioner viz., Dr. K. Tagore was impleaded as an opposite-party to C.D. No. 313 of 1990. 2. Briefly stated, the complaint was filed by one Avula Gopala Rao, alleging that his son Annavarapu Satyanarayana, as he was suffering from fever on 8.7.90 and 9.7.90 was taken to T.N. Reddy Memorial Hospital, Tadepalligudem and was treated by Dr. T. Jayaprakash Reddy. Due to negligence and carelessness, his son became unconscious and he was taken on 9.7.90 to Kakinada Nursing Home at 1.30 p.m. and was admitted and he was treated by Dr. K. Tagore, the revision petitioner herein. But his son died on 10.7.90 at about 11.00 p.m. 3. On these allegations, the complaint-C.D. No. 331/90 was initiated by making Dr. T. Jaya Prakash Reddy only as an oppose party...

Kannegolla Naghabhushanam Vs. the Land Acquisition Officer

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1993AP209

ORDER1. The claimant in O.P. No. 56/85 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Eluru is the petitioner in this revision. He filed this revision aggrieved by the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Eluru in I.A. No. 226 of 1990 in O.P. No. 56 of 1985 dated 10-3-1992 holding that the review petition filed by the petitioner for review and modification of the judgment passed in O.P. No. 56 of 1985 dated 29-10-90, is not maintainable.2. The facts in brief are as follows : The Government acquired Ac. 3.80 cents of land belonging to the petitioner in R.S. No. 779 in Block No. II of Eluru town for providing house sites for the weaker sections. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 6-12-1983. The Land Acquisition Officer (L.A.O.) passed the award No. 1/84-85 on 31-10-1984 fixing the market value of the land at Rs. 48,400/- per acre. On a reference made under Section 18 of the L. A. Act to the Civil Court, at the instance of the petitioner, the ...