Andhra Pradesh Court January 1995 Judgments

Musini Leela Prasad Vs. Musini Bhavani and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(1)ALT814

ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J.1. The first defendant is the appellant. The plaintiff is the wife of the first defendant. She filed a suit in forma pnuperis for partition of the plaint ' A' Schedule properties by metes and bounds and as per good and bad qualities into three equal shares and for possession of one such share to the plaintiff after ejecting the defendants therefrom and for costs of the suit. The averments of the plaint, in brief, are as follows:-2. It plaintiff is the legally wedded wife of the first defendant. The second defendant is the undivided brother of defendant No. 1, while defendant No. 3 is the mother of defendants 1 and 2. Sri Musini Narasimhamurty, is the father of defendants 1 and 2 and the husband of the third defendant. The immovable properties described in the plaint 'A' schedule are the ancestral joint family properties of the said joint family. The said Narasimhamurty, died intestate and undivided from his sons in or about 1960. He left behind him his two sons i.e...

New India Assurance Company Ltd. by Its Branch Manager Vs. G. Lakshmi ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(1)ALT107

Motilal B. Naik, J.1. These two Civil Miscellaneous Appeals arise out of an order passed in O.P. No. 166 of 1984 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge-cum-Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, dated 29-9-1986. Therefore, these two CM. As. are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. C.M.A. No. 176/87 is filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited - third respondent in O.P. No. 166/84. C.M.A. No. 534 of 1987 is filed by the claimants in the said O.P. No. 166/84.3. For the purpose of disposal, the parties are referred to as claimants/ petitioners and respondents.4. The claimants filed O.P. No. 166/84 for the death of one Sankaraiah in a road accident claiming a total compensation of Rs. 75,000/-. The first claimant is the wife of the deceased Sankaraiah, claimants 2, 3 and 4 are the minor children of late Sankaraiah born to the first claimant and claimants 5 (since died) and 6 are the parents of late Sankaraiah.5. It is the case of the claim...

B. Mettubandi Vs. T. Lakshmamma and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(1)ALT866

ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. This revision is directed against the rejection of plea for amendment of the plaint The amendment sought to be inserted was that when the suit properties were purchased by the plaintiff and his brother in the name of their mother Hanumakka, the plaintiff and his brother Nagappa were the members of the joint family governed by Mitakshara Law, and that the sale deed was taken in the year 1946 and by that time the plaintiff and his brothers were living jointly constituting the members of a joint Hindu family. In fact, this was a plea concerning with Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 (Act 45 of 1988). Such a plea was not superfluous and in fact an issue was already framed by the Lower Court to the effect that 'whether the suit transaction is hit by Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 (Act 45 of 1988), if so, of what consequence?' When the petitioner sought to amend the plaint inserting the above plea which is in no way inconsistent and superf...

Vadde Narayana Reddy Vs. Mandal Revenue Officer and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(1)ALT870

ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. The point which arises for consideration in this Revision Petition is as to whether the Court is empowered to implead any party in a suit, if satisfied that the party is a necessary and proper party, even though the application for impleading seeks the impleadment of a different party.2. O.S.No. 42/92 was instituted on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Anantapur by the petitioner against the Respondents 2 and 3. The plea was that the suit schedule land was a government land and that the same was in illegal possession of the petitioner and that he was evicted by invoking the provisions contained under A.P. Land Encroachment Act and that the said land was assigned to respondents 2 and 3. Respondent No. 1 who is the Mandal Revenue Officer in this Revision Petition filed LA.No. 1205/92 to implead him as one of the defendants, but instead, the Court of District Munsif impleded the Collector. The plaintiff who was the 1st respondent in that imp...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. G. Lakshmi and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: II(1995)ACC510; 1996ACJ1068

Motilal B. Naik, J.1. These two civil miscellaneous appeals arise out of an order passed in O.P. No. 166 of 1984 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge-cum-Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, dated 29.9.1986. Therefore, these two C.M.As. are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. C.M.A No. 176 of 1987 is filed by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., third respondent in O.P. No. 166 of 1984. C.M.A. No. 534 of 1987 is filed by the claimants in the said O.P. No. 166 of 1984.3. For the purpose of disposal, the parties are referred to as claimants-petitioners and respondents.4. The claimants filed O.P. No. 166 of 1984 for the death of one Sankaraiah in a road accident claiming a total compensation of Rs. 75,000/-. The first claimant is the wife of the deceased Sankaraiah, claimant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are the minor children of late Sankaraiah born to the first claimant and claimant Nos. 5 (since died) and 6 are the parents of late Sankaraiah.5. It is the...

The Manager, British Biologicals Vs. P.L. Prasad and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum in CDC 4/94 District Forum, Chittoor whereby it directed the Opposite Party No. 1 to pay compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant and also Rs. 500/- toward costs. 2. The case of the complainant is that the Doctor prescribed on 15.11.92 B-Protein as the complainant was suffering with bodily pains etc. According to the complainant he had been taking B-Protein from that day. He purchased a bottle of B-Protein from the second Opposite Party on 6.11.93 for a consideration of Rs. 49.45 Ps. On the bottle it was mentioned that the contents were manufactured in April, 1993. It is the case of the complainant when he tried to open the bottle in order to take the B-Protein, he found insects 'Mukku Purugulu' and the same could be seen by the naked eye through the glass of the bottle. He showed the bottle to the second Opposite Party. As there was no proper response from the second Opposite Party, he approached t...

Parchuri Rajya Lakshmir Vs. Parchuri Viswa Sankara Prasad

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1995AP147; 1995(1)ALT628

1. In this Civil Revision Petition, the petitioner questions the order of the learned Subordinate Judge at Machi-lipatnam in I.A. No. 564 of 1985 in O.P. No. 127 of 1984 dated 12-3-1991. -The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. The respondent filed the said O.P. No. 127 of 1984 for restitution of conjugal rights and the petitioner herein filed I. A. No. 564 of 1985 for interim maintenance and expenses to prosecute and defend, in the said O. P. The learned Subordinate Judge allowed the said f.A. granting the petitioner herein maintenance at Rs. 150/- per month instead of Rs. 200/- per month as claimed by her and also Rs. 500/- towards legal expenses. The learned Subordinate Judge granted the said interim maintenance only from 1-12-1990, even though the said I. A. was filed in February, 1985. In this C.R.P. the petitioner contends that she is entitled to grant of interim maintenance from the date of the filing of the I.A. i.e., from February, 1985. She also contends that she is ent...

D. Shanker and anr. Vs. Smt. Ananta Laxmi

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(1)ALT547

B. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. These two second appeals have been filed against the common judgment rendered in A.S. Nos. 111 and 132 of 1988 on the file of the Court of the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Second Appeal No. 551 of 1992 arises out of A.S.No. 111 of 1988 while second appeal No. 552 of 1992 arises out of A.S. No. 132 of 1988. The appellants are the defendants in O.S. No. 534 of 1981 while they are the plaintiffs in O.S.No. 369 of 1981.The respondent had laid O.S. No. 534 of 1981 for a mandatory injunction to remove the illegal and unauthorised constructions made by demolishing a part of the common wall on the northern side in between the two houses owned by the appellants and the respondent respectively. As a counter blast O.S.No. 369 of 1981 was instituted by the appellants seeking the relief of mandatory injuction against the respondent to dismantle the roof laid by her. Earlier, a suit in O.S. No. 4381 of 1980 was laid by the respondent against the fathe...

N. Yadagiri Vs. K. Rajaiah Goud, Advocate

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. This complaint is filed against one K. Rajaiah Goud, Advocate, Secretary, Subash Chandrabose Law College, Warangal complaining that on account of the wrongful act of the Opp. Party withholding the issue of transfer certificate applied for in February, 1992, as a result of which the complainant lost two years valuable time for prosecuting further studies and also job potentialities as he became overaged for which he claimed compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- from the Opp. Party. 2. The complainant's case briefly stated is that he paid a sum of Rs. 500/- to the Law College and was admitted into I year Law Course in the year 1991-92. At the end of the first year an undertaken was taken by the Opp. Party stating that he paid only a sum of Rs. 500/- towards first year fee and will pay the remaining amount of Rs. 2200/- at the time of taking the memo. The complainant continued the II year LLB and applied on 12.2.1992 for issue of transfer certificate. But acco...

Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Bondili Sitharam ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: I(1995)ACC540; 1996ACJ242; AIR1995AP268; 1995(1)ALT696

1. In this appeal against the order dated 17-3-1987 of the 1st Additional District Judge-cum-Ist Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribubnal, Krishna at Machilipatnam in M.V.O.P. No. 100 of 1985, the Insurance Company contends that it is wrongly made liable for payment of the compensation for the death of one Bondili Lalith Kumar Singh in a motor accident involving lorry bearing registration No. ABK 339 on 8-9-1984 near Gudlavalleru in Krishna District.2. Respondents 1 to 4 herein preferred the said O.P. claiming in all a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs towards compensation for the death of Lalith Kumar Singh. Lalith Kumar Singh was the son of respondents 1 and 2 herein and the brother of respondents 3 and 4 herein. The 5th respondent was the owner of the lorry. The Tribunal held that the accident occurred because of the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver, the 1st respondent in the O.P. He is not impleaded in the present appeal. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 50,000/- in all. The Tribu...