Andhra Pradesh Court March 1994 Judgments

Dr. G. Sarangapani Vs. G. Bharat

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The opposite party in C.D. No: 251 of 1990, Dr. G. Sarangapani, Orthopedician, Baktavastala Nursing Home, Santhapeta, Ongole is the appellant. The respondent herein filed a complaint stating that on account of the deficiency of service rendered by the opposite party, he suffered permanent physical disability. 2. The case of the complainant was that on 30-1-1990 he sustained an injury on his left fore-hand due to fall. When he went to the opposite party, he admitted him and on his advice an X-ray was taken. The opposite party after examining the applicant with the aid of X-ray negligently stated that it was a simple crack and so saying applied bandage and advised the complainant to do some exercises. But the treatment suggested by the opposite party did not in any way heel the fracture. The complainant underwent acute pain and suffering even when moving his hand. Subsequently, he was admitted in Nalluri Nursing Home, where he got his left hand operate...

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Divisional Manager Vs. Ma ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(2)ALT573

G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. Aggrieved by the award passed by the lower tribunal granting compensation of Rs. 60,000/- for the death of a boy aged about 16years in motor accident, the insurance company filed the appeal. The parents of the deceased also filed cross-objections for enhancement.2. It is contended by the insurance company that the lower tribunal has not followed the procedure prescribed by the Supreme Court in assessing the quantum of compensation. The Lower tribunal held that due to the death of the boy, the parents had lost their future hope. He therefore fixed the compensation by applying the multiplier 15. The learned Judge has lost sight of the fact that the deceased was only 16 years by the time of accident and the question of his rendering assistance to his parents will arise only after he gets good employment and earns attractive salary. Basing upon the merit certificates in games and percentage of marks obtained by the deceased in his SSC examination, the learned Judg...

Branch Manager, Indian Bank Vs. the Distt. Collector and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. These two appeals arise out of an order passed in C.D. No. 1099/90, District Forum, Khammam and hence are being disposed of by a common order. 2. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum granting Rs. 1000/- as compensation, the 3rd opposite party, the Indian Bank, preferred appeal, C.D.A, No. 302/91. Complaining that the District Forum should have directed the bank to release the loan and payment of a sum of Rs. 9500/- towards cost of construction of shed and Rs. 36/- per day towards wages, the complainant preferred appeal, C.D.A. No. 81/92. 3. Briefly stated, the complainant, educated unemployed woman, was selected for grant of loan under Gramodaya Scheme for setting up of an ice-parlour and was referred by the second opposite party to the Indian Bank i.e. the third opposite party for sanction of loan. The complainant went to the Bank and contacted its Manager on 11.1.90 who asked the complainant to see him on 9.3.90 and again on 23.3.90. She wa...

Miss Lydia Renuka Vs. K. Soloman Raju

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: II(1995)DMC619

Immaneni Panduranga Rao, J.1. This application is filed under Section 37 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 seeking a direction to the respondent to pay the applicant a sum of Rs. 2,000/- per month towards alimony. Section 37 applies only to cases where a decree absolute is passed declaring the marriage to be dissolved or on any decree of judicial separation obtained by the wife. The prayer in O.P. No. 3 of 1992 is declaring the marriage null and void. That prayer having been allowed the legal effect is that the marriage does not exist. The marriage said to have taken place between the applicant and the respondent being a nullity and non set, the marital relationship between the applicant and the respondent as wife and husband does not exist at any time and as such, the question of directing the respondent to pay alimony does not arise.2. That is obviously the reason why the Legislature, under Section 37 of the Indian Divorce Act, has limited the power to order permanent alimony only in c...

Kanti Naramma Vs. the Agent to Government, (District Collector) and or ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(2)ALT181

ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. Questioning the order dated 30-3-1989 passed by the 1st respondent in C.M.A. No. 19 of 1986 confirming the order of the 2nd respondent dt.8-8-1985, the present writ petition is filed. By the impugned order dated 8-8-1985, the 2nd respondent directed eviction of the petitioner from an extent of Ac. 13-20 guntas situate in S. Nos. 77 and 16 of Kamalapuram village of Singareni Mandal, Khammam District and restoration of possession to the 3rd respondent herein who is a tribal.2. The relevant facts are these: The 3rd respondent filed a representation on 2-1-1978 complaining to the concerned authorities that his father was the pattedar of the land and it was illegally occupied by the petitioner and her son. On that complaint, an enquiry under the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Areas) Land Transfer Regulation (Regulation I of 1959) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Land Transfer Regulation') was initiated and notice was issued to the petitioner. In the course of enqu...

Lydia Renuka Vs. K. Soloman Raju

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(1)ALT395

ORDERImmaneni Panduranga Rao, J.1. This application is filed under Section 37 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 seeking a direction to the respondent to pay the applicant a sum of Rs. 2,000/-per month towards alimony. Section 37 applies only to cases where a decree absolute is passed declaring the marriage to be dissolved or on any decree of judicial separation obtained by the wife. The prayer in O.P. No. 3 of 1992 is for declaring the marriage null and void. That prayer having been allowed, the legal effect is that the marriage does not exist. The marriage said to have taken place between the applicant and the respondent being a nullity and non-est, the marital relationship between the applicant and the respondent as wife and husband does not exist at any time and as such, the question of directing the respondent to pay alimony does not arise.2. That is obiously the reason why the legislature, under Section 37 of the Indian Divorce Act, has limited the power to order permanent alimony o...

Miss Lydia Renuka Vs. Mr. K. Soloman Raju

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(1)ALT392

ORDERI. Panduranga Rao, J.1. The Original Petition has came up for consideration of making the decree nisi absolute by virtue of the directions given by a Division Bench of this Court in O.S. Appeal No. 5 of 1993.2. O.P. No. 3 of 1992 is filed by the wife seeking a decree for the nullity of her marriage with the respondent which has taken place on 6-6-1991 at Hyderabad. An ex parte decree dated 25-9-1992 was passed by me under Section 18 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 declaring that the marriage between the petitioner with the respondent performed on 6-6-1991 is null and void.3. Subsequent to passing of the above decree, the respondent herein filed Application No. 521 of 1992 under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act to condone the delay of 18 days in filing the petition to set aside the ex parte decree. That petition was dismissed on 4-2-1993. It is stated that challenging the order in Application No. 521 of 1992, the respondent herein filed O.S. Appeal No. 2 of 1993, but he did n...

Komati Rajam Vs. State of A.P., Rep. by Public Prosecutor

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(1)ALT639; 1995(1)ALT(Cri)317

G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. This appeal is filed against the judgment is Sessions Case No. 148 of 1992 passed by the Sessions Judge, Adilabad, convicting and sentencing the accused- appellant to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000-00 for the offence under Section 302 IPC and further to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000-00 for the offence under Section 354 IPC.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:On 20-3-1992 at 8 p.m. when the deceased-Muchini Poshavva was alone in her house, the accused entered into her house by consuming liquor and dragged her with an intention to outrage her modesty. Then in order to rescue herself struggled with him and beat him with a broom. The accused got wild and attacked her by taking a stick from the heap of firewood and beat her on various vital parts of her body. Then P.Ws. 2 and 3 came mere and intervened and prevented the accused from further assaulting the deceased. Thereafter the accused left the p...

Official Liquidator, Business Machines (i.) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bank of Indi ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [1998]91CompCas434(AP)

S. Dasaradharama Reddy, J. 1. This is an application filed under section 529, sub-section (2) of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act'), by the official liquidator seeking a direction to the respondents, Bank of India, Tirupathi (the bank) and the A.P. Industrial Development Corporation, Hyderabad (APIDC), which are secured creditors of Business Machines (India) Pvt. Ltd., which has been wound up, to pay the salaries of the watch and ward staff including the arrears from February 1, 1992. According to the application, by an order dated April 22, 1988, in Company Petition Nos. 15 and 59 of 1987 this court directed winding up of the company. The bank filed a suit for recovery of the money due to it and also obtained leave of this court to stay outside the winding up proceedings. On the other hand, APIDC has not informed the applicant about the course of action it has adopted or proposes to adopt. Pursuant to the orders of this court in C.A. Nos. 251 and 252 of 1988, the Advocate ...

K. Balagopal Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(1)ALT479; 1994CriLJ1715

ORDER1. This writ petition is filed seeking for a writ of Habeas Corpus to discharge the accused (Detenus mentioned in the Annexure to the writ petition) under Section 4(1) of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 hereinafter called 'the TADA' for brevity, and consequently direct the designated Court, Kurnool to discharge the accused under the provisions of the TADA Act, and order transfer under Section 18 of the Act so as to enable the accused to apply for bail. 2. The General Secretary, Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee is the petitioner. 43 persons shown in the annexure, along with 14 persons were arrested in Crime No. 5/94 of II Town Police Station, Nandyal under Sections 147, 148, 506 read with 149, IPC and under Section 4(1) of TADA Act, 1987 and Section 7(1) of Criminal Amendment Act. As the First Information Report was filed under Section 4(1) of TADA Act, they have applied for bail before the Sessions Court, Kurnool which is the designated Court und...