Andhra Pradesh Court April 1993 Judgments

Dr. M. Alimelu and ors. Vs. Principal, Osmania Medical College and ors ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT227

Motilal B. Naik, J.1. The petitioners seek a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Principal, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, the 1st respondent, cancelling the Entrance Test for recruitment to Diplomate National Board Course examination held on 17-2-1993, in Circular No. OMC/DNB/93, dated 27-2-1993, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice.2. During the pendency of the writ petition, by order of this court dated 9-4-1993 in WPMP No. 5554 of 1993, respondents 2 to 52 were impleaded to the writ petition.3. Though the relief sought by the petitioners centres round the cancellation of entrance test which was held on 17-2-1993, on hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent No. 1 and learned counsel for respondents 2 to 52, the intricacies involved in the writ petition do not look to be that much narrow as canvassed by the petitioners. Respondents 2 to 52 getting themselves impleaded to the writ...

B. Purushotham Naidu Vs. Kommineni Venkata Narayana @ Narayana Rao

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The complainant who is respondent in this appeal filed C.D. No. 50/91 on the file of the District Forum Gunter against the opposite party i.e. Amaravathi Chits Fund (Pvt.) Limited, Managing Partners, Bethamcherla, Purushotham Naidu, Chilakaluripet for payment of the installments paid and also Rs. 10,000/- as compensation. 2. The basis of the claim is that the complainant is a subscriber for a chit of Rs. 25,000/- the monthly subscription being Rs. 1,000/-. The complainant paid five monthly installments beginning from 9.5.1988. He was not a prized bidder in any of the auction. All of a sudden, the opposite party closed the business without completing the chit scheme. As they are unable to repay the amount, the above complaint was filed. 3. B. Purushotham Naidu filed a counter. He contended that he had no connection whatsoever with the chit fund company and generally denied the other allegations. In view of the advertisement regarding, opening of the c...

Chittajallu Venkata Tulasi Padma Jyothi Vs. A.V.V. Satyanarayana Das a ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT88

ORDERImmaneni Panduranga Rao, J.1. This revision is filed by the 2nd defendant in O.S.No. 208 of 1990 on the file of Sub-Court, Rajahmundry. The suit filed by the 1st respondent herein was dismissed for default on 1-2-1991. Thereupon he filed I.A.No. 252/91 under Order 9 Rule 9 C.P.C. for restoration of the suit. The suit was restored on 20-6-91 on conditions. The review petition filed by the 1st respondent herein was dismissed.2. He filed C.M.A. No. 52/91 on the file of the court of I Additional District Judge., Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. The learned Addl. District Judge holding that the condition with regard to the deposit of the entire suit costs is onerous and unjustified, has set side that condition. He, therefore, directed the restoration of the suit on condition of the plaintiff paying Rs. 100/- towards costs to the defendants.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, relying upon the decision of this court in K. Hara Gopal v. K. Venkata Ratna Kumar, : 1993(1)ALT482 (...

The Senior Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India Vs. G.V.V.N. Ha ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT524

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. The Senior Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the Food Corporation of India') is the appellant in C.M.A.No. 544 of 1981 and petitioner in C.R.P.No. 2820 of 991. These cases arise out of the same facts, so they can be disposed of together.2. The Food Corporation of India challenges the order of the learned II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dated 29-8-1980 in O.P. No. 194/79 dismissing the O.P. filed by the Food Corporation of India and allowing the suit O.S.No. 426 of 1979 filed by the arbitrator, to make the award rule of the Court.3. Sri N.V. Suryanarayana Murthy, the learned counsel for the Food Corporation of India, contends that the trial court erred in decreeing the suit and dismissing the O.P. as the arbitrator has misconducted himself in law and the award suffers from error of law apparent on the face of the record.4. The learned counsel for the respondent contractor, on the other hand contends...

Khajyam Seetharamaiah and ors. Vs. Jasti Surya Prakasa Rao and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT330

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, J.1. These three Civil Revision Petitions arise out of a common order.2. The plaintiffs in O.S.No. 98/80 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Markapur are the petitioners herein, who are questioning the order made in I.A.Nos. 8/91,9/91 and 10/91 dismissing the petitions filed by them. The suit was filed for declaration of title in respect of Ac. 19-00 cents in S.No. 468 and for permanent injunction.3. The suit was originally dismissed. The plaintiffs carried the matter in appeal-A.S. 1 /83 before the High Court. The High Court allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the lower Court. While remanding the matter, the learned single Judge observing that as the trial Judge has not properly applied his mind to the facts and circumstances of the case, directed the trial Court to dispose of the matter afresh. After remand, the petitioners filed three applications viz., I.A.8/91 under Order 16 Rule 6 C.P.C to summon witnesses and to produce documents; I.A.9/...

The Chief Hospital Superintendent Vs. P.V. Rama Mohan Rao and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy,President: 1. The complainant in C.D. No. 85 of 1992 i.e. the first respondent herein, is an exemployee of Railways. He took his daughter who was pregnant to the Railway Hospital on 19.6.91. The Chief Hospital Superintendent, Railways agreed to treat her for regular check ups in the Railway Hospital and accordingly, the complainant paid Rs.20/- for that purpose. Subsequently he took his daughter to the hospital and paid consultation and lab charges. Expected delivery date was given by the doctors as 7.11.91. On that day aspains started he took his daughter to Dr. Suhasini, Railway doctor who checked the patient and told them to come back on 14.11.1991. But as pains started again on the night of 12.11.1991, the complainant took his daughter to the Railway Hospital and he was informed that the Doctors were on strike and that he should take his daughter to Gandhi Hospital without any delay. Accordingly, the complainant took his daughter to Gandhi Hospital on the night...

Dr. M. Ratna Vs. Kottiboyina Navaneetam (Died) and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1994AP96; 1993(2)ALT459

1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiff in O.S. 54 of 1980 in the court of District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam.2. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of her title to the plaint schedule property which is a house situated at Machilipatnam and for possession thereof after ejecting the defendants therefrom and for past and future profits and also the cost of a radio. The plaintiff alleges that she is the second wife of late K. Hanumantha Rao who was the owner of the suit property and claims the suit property under a Will dated 15-12-76 said to have been executed by Hanmantha Rao who died on 3-2-77. The first defendant is the first wife of Hanmantha Rao and defendants 2 to 5 are the tenants of the said house.3. The first defendant denied the Will said to have been executed by late Hanmantha Rao. She contended that the plaintiff is not the second wife of late Hanmantha Rao and so she will not get the property as persona designata even if the Will is proved. She denied the exi...

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Vs. Sha ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT(Cri)86; 1993CriLJ3320

S.V. Maruthi, J. 1. This appeal by the State is against the acquittal of A.1 of the offences punishable under Sections 342 and 302, I.P.C. in S.C. No. 445 of 1990 on the file of the Court of Session, Guntur Division Guntur. 2. Originally, A.1 along with his father and mother who are A.2 and A.3 were tried under three charges viz., Section 342, I.P.C. direct against A.1, 302, I.P.C. against A.1 and Section 302 read with Section 109, I.P.C. against A.2 and A.3. 3. The case of the prosecution is that A.1 poured kerosene on the body of the deceased in their house situated in the village Reddigudem on 21-6-1990 at about 10.00 a.m. and set fire to her and escaped by tying the thatti doors of the house with a rope which resulted in extensive burn injuries and death on 8-7-1990 at 11.00 p.m. 4. The deceased was originally married to one Bure Syda of Bellamkonda four years prior to the date of offence and had a son by name Adamsa. Due to misunderstandings, the deceased left her husband and son ...

Bojja Raju Vs. the United India Insurance Company Ltd., Rep. by Its Ma ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(2)ALT76

G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the claimant-petitioner challenging the order dated 29-11-1991 passed in J.A.(SR) No. 9196.91 in O.P.S.R.No. 2127 of 1991 refusing to condone the delay of 216 days in re-presenting the O.P.2. The delay in presentation has to be viewed strictly as each and every day's delay has to be explained, and it is no doubt a general principle of law. But in cases of re-presentation the same test need not be applied in letter and spirit. Generally in Motor Accident claims cases liberal view has to be taken. It may be remembered that the claimants have already lost their sole bread-winner and if they are denied the just compensation by courts on technical grounds, they will be put to untold misery. The object of the Legislation is to come to the rescue of the destitutes who lost their sole bread-winner. In this case the claim petition was filed within time, but there is delay in re-presentation. Considering the explanation given by the petiti...

Chinta Thirupathaiah and anr. Vs. E. Bhadraiah and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT562

Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. This appeal is filed against the order and decree dt.29-8-1985 in M.A.T.O.P.No. 64 of 1984. On the file of the District Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Khammam.2. The appellants/claimants, parents of the deceased Chinta Venkateswara Rao, filed M.A.T.O.P.No. 64 of 1984, claiming compensation for the death of the deceased in a motor accident occurred on 9-2-1985 at about 9-00 a.m. near Gogupaka village due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle - Tractor and Trailor bearing Nos. 3949 and 3950 respectively. The learned Judge on appreciation of the material and evidence available on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs. 17,000/- Rs. 15,000/- for general damages and Rs. 2,000/- for mental agony and pain with interest at 6% per annum. Aggrieved by the said award the appellants/claimants filed the present appeal.3. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants contends that, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meagre an...