Andhra Pradesh Court July 1995 Judgments

Chandrapalaka Prabhakar Vs. Chandrapalka Sadanandam

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(4)ALT689

ORDERK.M. Agarwal, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the plaintiff in the suit who was successful in obtaining an ex parte preliminary decree for partition against the respondent herein, who is hereinafter referred to as the defendant in the suit.2. Aggrieved by the ex parte decree, the defendant in the suit filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC which was initially allowed subject to certain conditions. Those conditions were not fulfilled by him and therefore, the ex parte decree revived. Consequently, the defendant in the suit again moved an application for setting aside the ex parte decree which was dismissed. That order was maintained by this Court in a Civil Revision Petition filed by him. After disposal of the Civil Revision Petition, the defendant in the suit filed an appeal before this Court along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The application was allowed by the learned single Judge...

Dr. K. Subramanyam Reddy Vs. Sri Venkateswara University Rep. by the R ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(3)ALT386

Prabha Shankar Mishra, C.J.1. Petitioner in the application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has invoked the letters patent power of this Court and appealed against the Judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court by which the Court has declined to set aside the Order No. E.11-1/92 dated 9-12-1992 of the 2nd respondent, the Vice-Chancellor of Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupathi and to issue directions to the respondents to permit the petitioner-appellant to rejoin in the post of lecturer in Chemistry in Sri Venkateswara University College of Arts and Sciences.2. Facts relevant for the issues involved in the appeal are that with his qualifications in Physical Chemistry and teaching experience the petitioner was appointed as lecturer by the order dated 31-1-1982 of the first respondent and was placed on probation for a period of two years in which post he was later confirmed. He got, according to him, Post-doctoral position in the department of Chemistry, EPEL, CH-10...

Tata Timken Limited Vs. M. Venkatarao and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum passed in CD. No. 491/1993, the opposite party, that is, Tata Timken Ltd. preferred this appeal. 2. This first respondent herein one M. Venkatarao filed a complaint claiming return of the original shares certificate and also damages of Rs. 21,500/- from the opposite party and costs. The complainants case was that he was allotted 20 partly convertible debentures which have to be converted later into 100 shares and also 20 part-B debentures. Subsequently, those debentures were converted into original share certificates for which the numbers and the allotment number were mentioned in the complaint. The complainants grievance is that he sent the original share certificates to the opposite party for endorsement on 27.4.92 by registered post buthe did not receive back the share certificates after due endorsement by the first opposite party. He sent reminders on 30.8.92 by registered post acknowledgement due, but...

Seetarama General Stores Agencies Rep. by Its Prop. S. Radhakrishna Mu ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(3)ALT531

ORDERY.V. Narayana, J.1. The respondent-in R.C.C.No. 84 of 1988 on the file of the learned Rent Controller, Vijayawada filed this Revision Petition against the order dated 10-4-1995 passed in C.M.A.No. 151 of 1994 on the file of the Prl. Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada.2. The brief facts of the case are: K.S. Sivaramayyar the original petitioner was the landlord of the upstair building bearing D.No. 11-44-15 and 16 situate in Kummari Street Vijayawada and the respondent is the tenant in the ground floor portion of the schedule building. The petitioner required the petition schedule building for his personal occupation to commence business in boarding. So he requested the respondent-tenant to vacate and deliver the petition schedule building for his proposed business, as the petitioner has no other building to commence the said business. The respondent-tenant promised to vacate the building by end of April, 1988, but he failed to vacate the said premises. Therefore the petitioner filed th...

Management of Praga Tools Ltd. Vs. Chairman-cum-presiding Officer, Add ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: (1996)ILLJ748AP

P.S. Mishra, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order of a learned single Judge, pending challenge to an award of reinstatement of a workman by Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-Additional Labour Court, Hyderabad. Learned Single Judge of this Court has ordered suspension of the impugned award on condition that the appellant comply with the provisions of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act. The respondent-workman appeared and made a grievance that the appellant, while implementing the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act, paid him the wages at the rate at which he was drawing on the date of termination of services and not at the current rate of wages. Learned single Judge has said, 'By current wage, I mean the quantum of wage currently paid to a fresh recruit to the post held by the concerned delinquent employee.' He (the learned single Judge) has accordingly directed for payment of the current wages to the respondent-workman. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant has ...

Kannegolla Nagabhushanam Vs. Naraharisetti Ramamohanrao and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(3)ALT917

ORDERMaithili Sharan, J.1. This petition has been filed against the order dt. 25-1-1988 passed by the Additional District Judge, West Godavari, Eluru in C.M.A. No. 30 of 1987, dismissing the appeal and confirming the order dated 27-4-1987 passed in E.A.No.666 of 1986 in E.P.No.250 of 1984 in O.S.No.468 of 1980 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif, Eluru,2. The brief facts leading to this revision petition are thus: One Challagali Nagaraju (3rd respondent herein) filed Original Suit No. 468 of 1980 in the Court of the I Additional District Munsif, Eluru, against one Smt. N. Kanaka Durgamba and others for the recovery of Rs. 5,508/- with subsequent interest; it was decreed on 22-2-1983, and thereafter execution petition was filed by the decree holder for the recovery of a total amount of Rs. 7,001/-. The entire procedure of execution was followed, the scheduled property was attached and thereafter the property was sold in Court auction on 16-7-1986, subject of course to the mo...

Coramandal Marketing (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Andhra Pradesh Lighting Ltd ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(2)ALT826; (1996)IIILLJ1197AP

D.H. Nasir, J. 1. This appeal arises from an order passed by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Anantapur on 6.7.1993 in I.A. No. 18 of 1992 in O.S. No. 79 of 1991, by which it was held that there is no dispute with regard to the payment of amount mentioned under Exs. B. 2 and B. 3 by the defendant to the plaintiff, and therefore, there was no necessity of referring the matter to arbitration. 2. It appears that the parties entered into an agreement in the year 1980 for business transactions, which continued upto 1987. In April 1987 certain disputes arose regarding discount, brand, goodwill, development etc., which could not be settled amicably between the parties. The agreement contained and arbitration clause. Efforts were made to refer the disputes for arbitration, but the same did not materialise. The respondent-plaintiff, eventually caused a notice dated 15-2-1991 to be served upon the appellant-defendant, by which the plaintiff took a stand that there was no need for any arbitration...

Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors. Vs. G. Kondala Pal

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1995(3)ALT591; 1996(1)ARBLR129(AP)

P. Venkataraman Reddi, J. 1. C.M.A. No. 241 of 1991 and C.R.P. 593/91 are preferred against the common judgment in O.S. No. 374 of 1987 and O.P. No. 95 of 1988 (on the file of the I Addl. Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam). The appeal arises out of O.P. No. 95 of 1988 filed by the State under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act to set aside the award dated 27.7.1987 passed by a panel of Arbitrators consisting of three departmental officials-(1) Chief Engineer, (2) Deputy Secretary to Government, and (3) Director of Accounts, in respect of disputes concerning the contract agreement No. 23/81-82. The Revision Petition filed by the State arises out of the suit filed under Section 14(2) with a prayer to confirm the award passed by the panel of Arbitrators and to make it a Rule of Court and to pass a decree for Rs. 15,00,085/- with interest. 2. The contractor G. Kondala Rao who was the plaintiff in the suit and respondent in the O.P. died during the pendency of the proceedings in the l...

S.J.G.M. High School Vs. the Director of School Education Government o ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(1)ALD(Cri)410; 1995(3)ALT502; 1996CriLJ699

Syed Saadathulla Hussaini, J.1. This contempt case has been filed by the petitioner alleging that the respondents have violated the orders of this Court passed in W.A.No. 32 of 1991 dated 2-11-1992 and to punish them and to direct the respondent No. 1 to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner on merits. 2. At the outset, two preliminary objections have been raised by the respondents viz., (i) that the contempt case is barred by limitation under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. (ii) that no proceedings have been initiated within a period of one year from the date of contempt alleged, as such, the contempt case is not maintainable. 3. We have heard at length the arguments of both the counsel and we must say fairly that the learned Government Pleader has not pressed the first objection after conclusion of the arguments by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. With regard to the second objection, it is submitted, that the date of alleged contempt is 10-3-1994...

Kannegolla Ramchandra Rao and Company and anr. Vs. Smt. Kannegolla San ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1996(1)ALT120

ORDERN.Y. Hanumanthappa, J. 1. Defendants 1 and 2 in the suit, which was filed for recovery of a sum of Rs. 31,300/- being the principal and interest tnereon due to the plaintiff-1st respondent, are the appellants in this Letters Patents Appeal. 2. The trial Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit. On an appeal filed by the plaintiff in A.S. No.1244 of 1980, the learned single Judge of this Court allowed the same and decreed the suit for a sum of Rs. 27,452/- with interest at 12% from April 15, 1977 till realisation. Assailing the same, the present Letters Patent Appeal is preferred by Defendants 1 and 2. 3. The brief facts of the case are that - Smt. Kannegolla Santha Kumari, Kannegolla Ramachandra Rao, K.R.N.S. Lakshmana Rao, K.S. Rama Rao and Smt. Kannegolla Sarojini had formed a partnership firm under the name and style of 'M / s. Kannegolla Ramachandra Rao & Co.', which was a registered one, and carrying on business at Eluru. Earlier, Kannegolla Ramachandra Rao was the Managing Partn...