Andhra Pradesh Court April 1995 Judgments

M/S. Krishnaveni Constructions Vs. the Executive Engineer, Panchayat R ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1995AP362

ORDER1. The petitioner in this writ petition challenges the letter issued by the 1st respondent on 15-7-1993, by which the 1st respondent forfeited and recovered a sum of Rs. 1,12,800/- of the petitioner-firm, which had been deposited by it as earnest money with the 5th respondent-Bank. The petitioner also prays for the refund of Rupees 1,12,800/- with interest.2. In answer to the tender notice issued by the 1st respondent on 1-2-1993, the petitioner-firm submitted its tender on 17-3-1993 for construction of a summer storage tank at Darsi, a segment of Comprehensive Protected Water Supply Scheme to Kanigiri and 18 other villages. The estimated value of the summer storage tank was Rs. 80,00,000/-. The petitioner-firm, along with its tender, deposited a term deposit receipt No. 372206 for Rs. 1,12,800/- towards the earnest money deposit. In presence of the partner of the petitioner-firm the tender was opened at 4.15 p.m. The tender of the petitioner-firm was the lowest. The petitioner-fi...

K. Venateshwara Rao Vs. the Sub-inspector of Police and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(3)ALT791

ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking police aid and to see that the order passed by the civil Court is implemented.2. Mr. Radhakrishna, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, vehemently submits that in spite of the order of the Civil Court granting police aid, the same is not cared by the concerned police authorities and as such mis Court's jurisdiction is invoked under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner had filed a suit O.S. No. 178 of 1992 on the file of the District Munsif, Kodad for a decree of injunction and the same was decreed. It had also become final. E.A. No. 46 of 1994 in E.P. No. 25/94 in OS. No. 178 of 1992 was filed for police aid, but the same was not granted against which C.R.P. No. 4507 of 1994 was filed which was disposed of by my learned Brother P. Venkatarama Reddi, J. on 27-1-1995 directing the lower Court to consider the application for grant of police aid filed by the petitioner. Pursuant to the said order the p...

N. Venugopala Rao Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(2)ALT70

ORDERM.N. Rao, J.1. This Writ Appeal arises out of the judgment of a learned single Judge in W. P. No. 233 of 1955 negativing the request of the petitioner not to deduct any amounts from the subsistence allowance he is entitled to be paid. 2. The appellant was working in the Life Insurance Corporation at the relevant time as Assistant Administrative Officer. He was kept under suspension with effect from March 7, 1994 because of certain administrative lapses committed by him for which disciplinary action was initiated and criminal prosecution was also launched for misappropriation of certain amount of money. Regulation 37 of the LIC (Staff) Regulations governs matters relating to subsistence allowance. It reads : 'An employee under suspension shall be entitled to subsistence allowance as specified hereunder :- (a) Where the enquiry is domestic, for the first 90 days of suspension, 50% of the salary which the employee would have drawn had he been on privilege leave; 75% of the salary th...

G. Gangi Reddy and ors. Vs. the Custodian-deputy Commissioner of Endow ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(1)ALT867

ORDERS. Dasaradha Rama Reddy, J.1. All these writ petitions raise a common point and hence are disposed of by a common order. The question raised in these writ petitions is regarding the age of superannuation of employees of Sri Swamy Hathiramjee Mutt, Tirupati (hereinafter referred to as 'the Mutt'). The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 11749 of 1990 and 1158 of 1995 are Junior Assistants who completed 58 years of age, while all the petitioners in other two writ petitions are Class IV employees, who have completed 60 years of age as on today. Their contention is that the employees of the Mutt are not governed by Fundamental Rules or Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act 23 of 1984 and that they work at the pleasure of the Mahant. Their further contention is that it is only the Mahant who can terminate their services and not the Custodian who is merely kept in-charge. It may be stated here that in all the writ petitions, the impugned orders do not refer to ...

Puran Lal Vs. Smt. D. Sujatha and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(2)ALT609

Lingaraja Rath, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a common judgment in W.P. Nos. 11814 and 11816 of 1994 and hence are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The facts relating to the cases appear in detail in the judgment under appeal and hence need not be reiterated here at length. These appeals have been preferred by the appellant with the permission granted to prefer the appeals as he was not a party to the writ petitions. The main question urged in the appeals is that though the appellant in both the appeals was the person at whose instance the impugned notice dated 10-7-1984 was issued to the respondent No. 1 in the two appeals, yet he was neither impleaded as party-respondent to the writ petitions nor notice was issued by the High Court and the cases were disposed in his absence, by which he is prejudiced. It is his case that on 20-5-1965 he had been allotted the premises bearing No. 9/369 comprising of an area of 939.52 square yards; that the allottee of premises No. 9.368, w...

Mahalakshmi Legal and Tax Consultancy Services Rep. by Its Consultant- ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(2)ALT170

ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. This Writ Petition arises under Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. The Petitioner is a firm comprising of father and son. The firm applied for telephone in the year 1984 and the same was sanctioned and installed as telephone No. 64877 initially, and later on, it was re-numbered as 474877. In so far as this petitioner-firm is concerned no arrears are there. Smt. Maha Lakshmi, who is the wife of one of the Partners i.e., father, also has got independent telephone bearing No. 479093 and that was installed only in the year 1994. With regard to the above installation of telephone in the name of the petitioner-firm in the year 1984 and that of Smt. Mahalakshmi in the year 1994 is not disputed in the counter. It is stated that Smt. Mahalakshmi fell in huge arrears of over 8 lakhs on account of user of the above telephone No. 479093. May be that both these telephones are installed in the same house, but there is no reason to say that merely because she is the wife of one...

Gajuwaka Gram Panchayat, Rep. by the Executive Officer Vs. Medisetti V ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(2)ALT113

Lingaraja Rath, J.1. The defendant in the suit viz., Gajuwada Gram Panchayat, represented by the Executive Officer, Gram Panchayat, Gajuwaka, is the appellant before us. The suit was brought by the respondents claiming to have succeeded to the suit property on the strength of a will executed by their father who, they claim, purchased the property by two registered sale deeds dated 7-4-1964 and 15-7-1968 from one A.V. Bhanoji Rao. It is their case that though the land was being enjoyed peacefully after the purchase, yet the Grampanchayat was creating interference and obstructions to their possession and it has occupied the land for which they filed the suit for eviction and delivery of vacant possession of the land i.e., Survey No. 72/5 in Gajuwaka village corresponding to old Survey Nos. 58 and 59 measuring to an extent of Acs.2-79 cents. The suit was contested by the Gram Panchayat claiming the land to be inam land determined to be so under the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (Abol...

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Bhimavarapu Venkat Reddy

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The District Forum, Guntur directed the opposite party i.e.appellant herein to pay Rs. 13,000/- i.e.the loss assessed by the Surveyor and a further sum of Rs. 3,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 500/- towards costs. It also made certain remarks against the conduct of the officers of the Insurance Company. 2. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is preferred by the Insurance Company i.e.the opposite party. 3. It is firstly submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellant that the delay is not on the part of the Insurance Company, but it is mainly on account of the fact that the Surveyor submitted his report on 4.3.92 and that, therefore, the District Forum should have awarded interest only at the rate of 12%. We are not inclined to accept this contention. 4. The incident took place on 9.5.90 and till the date of the filing of the C.D. the claim of the insured was not settled by the Insurance Company. We are, therefore, satisfied that there is d...

B. Ranga Rao (Died) and Others Vs. G. Venkata Krishna Rao and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1996AP5; 1995(2)ALT307

ORDERV. BHASKAR RAO, J. 1. Defendants 5 to8 in O.S. No. 73 of 1977 on the file of the Court of Principal Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada are the appellants. They filed this appeal assailing the judgment of the learned single Judge in A.S. No. 1770 of 1984 in dismissing the appeal and confirming the decree and the judgment of the trial court.2. The facts of the case are that the first respondent herein is the plaintiff and he is the son of the second defendant. Defendants 2 and 3 are the sons of the first defendant. Defendant No. 4 is the son of the third defendant. The plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 are members of Hindu joint family governed by Mitakshara Law. The joint family of the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 owned and possessed 9 acres of wet land bearing R.S. No. 141/2 situated at Vanguturu village. The plaint schedule land is a fertile and valuable land and yielding was not less than 20 bags of paddy per acre and 40 tonnes of sugarcane per acre and it adjoins Telaprolu Vuyyuru ...

Ghouse MohiuddIn Vs. Dr. L. Bhaskar Reddy

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1995AP238; 1995(2)ALT73

ORDER1. This is a revision under Section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Petitioner is the tenant. He has questioned the order of the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, R.A. No. 174 of 1993) confirming the order passed in R.C. No. 345/89. By an order dated 29-2-1993 in R.C. 345/89, the learned Rent Controller closed the R.C. in view of the order passed on the same day in LA. 24/93 allowing the application of the landlord under Section 11(4) of the Act. The petitioner-tenant was directed, to vacate the premises within two months. '2. The main Rent Control case -- R.C. 345/89 was filed for the eviction of the tenant on the ground of wilful default in payment of the rent and also on the ground that the premises was required for personal occupation of the landlord. Along with the main petition, the landlord also filed an application under Section 11 of the Act seeking an or...