Andhra Pradesh Court April 1993 Judgments

Pachagnula Lakshmi Narasimhaiah Vs. Kaluva Satyanarayana and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT568

Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 75 of the Provincial Insolvency Act (for short 'The Act'). The petitioner herein is the debtor. He filed I.P.No. 14 of 1984 in the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Ongole under Section 10 of the Act praying that he may be declared as Insolvent. On 4-11-1986 the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Ongole allowed the petition. Dissatisfied with the said Judgment, the creditor filed an appeal A.S.No. 8 of 1987 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Ongole. On the question whether the petitioner has proved his inability to discharge his debt, the learned Additional District Judge, held in favour of the creditor on the ground that the insolvent did not make a declaration as postulated under Section 13(1)(e)(iii) of the Act; he set aside the order of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Ongole in the I.P. and allowed the appeal dismissing the I.P. by his judgment dated: 5-10-1987. T...

M. Rama Naidu and anr. Vs. B. Srinivasulu Naidu

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT471

ORDERP. Ramakrishnam Raju, J.1. The defendants in O.S.No. 1998/73 on the file of the 1st Additional District Munsif's Court, Chittoor are the petitioners in this revision petition.2. While the plaintiff was being examined as P.W.1, he wanted to mark as exhibit, the certified copy of the Commissioner's report in O.S.No. 152/68 for which, the petitioners had objected to. The lower Court considered the said objection and overruled the same by its order dated 22-2-1991. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners have preferred this revision.3. Sri K.V. Satyanarayana, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, submits that the Commissioner's report in an earlier suit, cannot ]be marked since it is neither a public document within the meaning of Section 74 of the Evidence Act, nor the Commissioner a public servant and the report is not a document prepared in discharge of his official duty. Elaborating this argument, the learned Counsel submits that the Commissioner appointed by a Court under a w...

Alapati Jalaiah Vs. Parripati Chandrasekhar Rao and Sons, Rep. by Part ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT533

ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J.1. These three revision petitions are disposed of by a common judgment as they arise out of a common judgment of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Guntur dismissing the R.C.As.26, 27 and 28 of 1985 and thereby confirming the common judgment of the learned Rent Controller (Principal Munsif Magistrate), Guntur dismissing R.C.C.Nos. 15, 16 and 73 of 1983 filed by the petitioner.2. The tenant is the petitioner in these revisions. He filed three R.C.Cs. viz., R.C.C.Nos. 15, 16 and 73 of 1983 on the file of Rent Controller Guntur, out of which, the present three revisions arose, in respect of the premises which he took on lease from the respondent in Guntur about 18 years back on a monthly rent of Rs. 325/- which was subsequently enhanced to Rs. 1000/- and Rs. 1300/- per month.3. R.C.C.16 of 1983 was filed on 4-2-83 under Section 4 of the Rent Controller Act for fixation of rent at Rs. 100/- per month. R.C.C.15 of 1983 was filed seeking a direction to permit him to deposi...

Golla Chinnaiah and ors. Vs. the District Collector and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT544

ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. Undoubtedly the lands bearing Survey Nos.3283,3284 and 3285 which are double crop wet lands situated at Dubba village of Nizamabad District, were acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was gazetted on 22-9-1976 invoking the urgency clause and dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. The declaration under Section 6 was as such published and gazetted simultaneously along with the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. Possession was also taken over on 4-4-1977 and in view of the provision contained under Section 16 of the Act, the land vested with the Government free of all encumbrances and the right which the petitioners had was only to claim the compensation in lieu of parting with the above land. It is also not disputed that after taking over possession, the land has been laid-out into plots and the house-sites have been ...

Amara Parvathi Vs. Peruri Chanti @ Chinnammayi (D. Hr.) and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT572

ORDERSyed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. The petitioner challenges the validity of the order dated August 29,1988 in E. A. No. 127 of 1982 in E.P. No. 7 of 1982 on the file of the Munsif Magistrate, Tuni. By the said order, the learned Munsif Magistrate declined to admit the document in evidence.2. Sri M.V. Suresh, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the document records gift by way of 'Pasupu Kumkuma' which has been recognised as valid under the ceiling law and, therefore, that principle ought to have been extended by the executing court and the document ought to have been admitted in evidence. He further contends that, even though under Section 49 of the Indian Registration Act the document is inadmissible in evidence yet for collateral purpose it can be admitted in evidence. Sri Balasubrahmanyam, the learned counsel for the first respondent, on the other hand, contends that the document is inadmissible in evidence both under Section 49 of the Indian Registration Act as ...

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. P.P. Narsinga Rao and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Lakshmana Rao, President: 1. These appeals coming on for hearing upon perusing the memo of grounds appeals and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. N Kama Raju Advocate for the appellant in CDA No. 318/92 and the respondent No. 2 in CDA No. 87/93 and of Mr. K. Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for the respondent No. 2 in CDA No. 318/ 92 and for the appellant in CDA No. 87/93 and respondent No. 1 in CDA No. 87/93 not appearing in person or by Advocate, the Court made the following order: 2. These two appeals arise out of a common order passed in C.D. No. 3/92 on the file of the District Forum, Hyderabad. The facts briefly stated are as follows : The complainant on 31.7.1982 booked for H.P. Gas connection under Registration No. 83595 with Satya Tulasi Agencies. No amount was paid on the booking. According to him, he made number of representations to the opposite parties on coming to know that the persons who booked for the gas connection much later than him, got their connections but he was not relea...

Omkar Stone Crusher, Rep. by Its Managing Partner S. Ramesh Babu Vs. t ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT328

ORDERBhaskar Rao, J.1. This writ petition is filed assailing the order of the Director of Mines & Geology, Hyderabad dated 21-2-1993. The case of the petitioner is that he was granted quarry lease on 17-12-1991 over an extent of Ac.1-40 cents in S.No. 640/P of Nallapadu village, Guntur district. On 29-1-1993, he went to the office of the 3rd respondent to execute the lease deed and deposited the required seigneorage fee, cess, assessment etc. Then he was informed that his lease was already revoked on 13-4-92 on the ground that he failed to execute the lease deed within 90 days from the date of grant of lease or within such further period as the Director may allow in this behalf. The petitioner is not aware of this time limit. Immediately on 4-2-1993, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Director of Mines & Geology, Hyderabad, who rejected the appeal as it was not filed within 60 days from the date of the order revocation i.e., the appeal was not filed on or before 12-6-1992. Hence...

Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by Its Chairman ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT455

Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. In an accident that took place on 6-3-1987, the deceased Gayapu Srinivasa Reddy, an agriculturist and businessman in fertilisers died. Alleging that the death of the deceased was due to the rash and negligent driving of the A.P.S.R.T.C. Bus bearing No. AAZ 1784 by its driver, an application has been filed by the claimants, who are the wife, parents and children of the deceased, under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act read with Rule 514 of the A.P.M.V. Rules, claiming a total compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-. That application was considered by the lower Tribunal on merits with reference to the evidence adduced by both parties, viz., P.Ws.1 to 3 and Exs.A-1 to A-8. Ultimately the learned Additional District Judge, duly taking into account the direct evidence of P.W.2, who is the driver of the motor cycle and the F.I.R., Ex.A-5, inquest report Ex.A-6, M.V.I. Report Ex.A-7 and post-mortem certificate Ex.A-8 and other attendant circumstances, held that both the dr...

The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Vs. B. Bhaskar, Bei ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1993(2)ALT570

G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the Insurance Company against the order dated 21st March, 1989 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sangareddy in O.P.No.1134 of 1987 awarding a total compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the petitioner for the injuries sustained by him on account of the dash given by the 1st respondent in O.P. due to his rash and negligent driving of the vehicle.2. P.W.1 is the father of the injured, who is a minor aged about 9 years. P.W.2 is an eye witness and P.W.3 is the minor boy himself. Their evidence clearly establishes that the accident occured due to the rash and negligent driving of the van by its driver, and that the injured P.W.3 received grievous injuries. His right foot was crushed completely fracturing all the bones of the foot, toe and second finger were completely damaged and the third finger of the foot also was damaged and later on the toe and second finger were amputated. So far as the accident is concerned and the cl...

Andhra Pradesh State Road Trans. Corpn. Vs. Gayapu Roopavathi and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994ACJ677

G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. In an accident that took place on 6.3.1987, the deceased Gayapu Srinivasa Reddy, an agriculturist and businessman in fertilizers, died. Alleging that the death of the deceased was due to the rash and negligent driving of the A.P.S.R.T.C. bus bearing No. AAZ 1784 by its driver, an application has been filed by the claimants, who are the wife, parents and children of the deceased, under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act read with Rule 514 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, claiming a total compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-. That application was considered by the Tribunal on merits with reference to the evidence adduced by both parties, viz., PWs 1 to 3 and Exhs. A-1 to A-8. Ultimately, the learned Additional District Judge, duly taking into account the direct evidence of PW 2, who is the driver of the motor cycle and the F.I.R., Exh. A-5, inquest report, Exh. A-6, M.V.I, report, Exh. A-7 and post-mortem certificate, Exh. A-8 and other attendant circu...