Andhra Pradesh Court November 1996 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Muppidi Krupakar Vs. Regional Manager, Central Bank of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)ALT185
ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J.1. This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings dated 14-5-1996 and the proceedings dated 24-6-1996 as illegal, arbitrary and unjust.2. The facts in brief, are as follows:The petitioner was appointed as clerk-cum-cashier on 6-6-1983 in the first respondent-organisation. He was promoted as Branch Manager and posted at Raipole Branch, Medak District on 9-8-1993. While so, on 5-4-1995, the first respondent issued a memo placing the petitioner under suspension on the allegation that a central card belonging to a customer of Yeldurthy Branch was found missing during the transit of the registered cover. The Central Office, Bombay-3rd respondent sent a credit card belonging to customer of Yeldurthy Branch in a registered postal cover by mistake to the petitioners Branch at Rayapur instead of sending it to the Yeldurthy Branch on 22-1-1994. On noticing that the cover was belonging to the Yeldurthy Branch, the entire cover was redirected and ...
Kanuboina Venkata Ramanaiah Vs. Palukuru Rukminamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)ALT511
ORDERS. Dasaradharama Reddy, J. 1. The petitioner who is the tenant has filed this revision petition against the reversing judgment of the appellate Court. The eviction petition was filed on 13-7-1989 on the grounds of material alteration in the building and willful default in payment of rents for the period from November, 1988 to March, 1989 at the rate of Rs. 190/- per month. The trial Court has rejected the plea regarding the material alteration in the building. Regarding the default, the learned Rent Controller held that since an advance amount of Rs. 1,000/- is lying with the landlord which represents rent for more than five months, the tenant cannot be said to be a wilful defaulter. Against the dismissal of the eviction petition, the landlord carried the matter in appeal. The finding regarding the material alteration of the building arrived at by the learned Rent Controller was upheld by the appellate authority. However, regarding the default, the learned Subordinate Judge held t...
Nimmaraju Samba Sadasiva Sarma Vs. Potharaju Venkateswara Rao (Died) a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(2)ALT147
ORDERP. Ramakrishnam Raju, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant. He filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining defendant Nos. 1 to 3, as originally shown, i.e., respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in the second appeal, since respondent Nos. 1 and 2 died pending the second appeal, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are brought on record as the legal representatives of the deceased respondent No. 2, from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property comprising Ac. 28-03 cents in Survey No. 272 of Sanampudi village, Vinukonda Taluk, Guntur District.2. According to the appellant, the suit property originally belonged to one Nimmaraju Venkateswarlu, an Advocate of Narasaraopet who obtained a decree in O.S.No. 472 of 1945 against one Kotha Ramachandraiah towards his fee and in execution of the said decree, he brought the suit property to sale in E.P.No. 69 of 1950 and purchased the same on 5-3-1979. The sale was confirmed on 28-4-1951 and the sale certificate No....
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. C. Basappa and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-1996
Reported in: II(1997)ACC636; 1997(1)ALT373
B.K. Somasekhara, J.1. The award of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Hyderabad twin cities, Hyderabad in W.C. No. 36 of 1988 date 26-9-1990 passing an order of penalty Under Section 4-A of the Workmen's Compensation Act (in short, the Act) as against the appellant/insurer is questioned on the ground that the law will not permit such an imposition of penalty on the insurer for non compliance of the directions in the award to pay the compensation awarded in favour of a workman within the stipulated period. Mr. Kota Subba Rao, the learned Counsel for the appellant has pointed that the law in this regard has been settled in various pronouncements including a latest pronouncement of this Court in C.M.A. No. 1286 of 1989 dated 22-8-1996 that there cannot be any such liability on the insurer to suffer such an order. The Law was dealt with in detail by this Court in C.M.A. No. 1286/89 dated 22-8-96, : (1997)IILLJ1133AP (Divl. Manager Oriental Insurance Co., Ltd. V. Zarina Bee) with...
Raj Kumar Sharma (Died) Rep. by His L.Rs. Vs. Jonnalagadda Satyanaraya ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALT573
ORDERA. Hanumanthu, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment and decree dated 31-1-1992 passed in R.C.A. No. 108/82 on the file of the Subordinate Judge at Vijayawada reversing the order of the Rent Controller in R.C.C. No. 31/81.2. The facts in brief are as follows:The respondents (sic. petitioners) 4 and 5 herein and their brother late Rajakumar Sharma whose legal representatives are petitioners, 1,2 and 3 (for the sake of convenience called as land-lords hereafter) filed the eviction petition R.C.C. No. 31/81 under Section 10(2)(i) and Section 10(3)(a)(iii)(a) of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act (Act 15 of 1960) (hereinafter called as the 'Act') on the grounds of wilful default in payment of rent and also on the ground of requiring the building for starting the existing business carried on by them in the non-residential premises let out to the respondent herein (referred as tenant). The tenant resisted that application by filing a counter denying the ...
Devireddy Amarender Reddy Vs. Pale Purushotham Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)ALT760
B.K. Somasekhara, J.1. The order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nalgonda, dismissing I.A.No. 764 of 1989 in an unregistered O.P. filed Under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, beyond the period of limitation prescribed in law, viz., after a delay of 249 days, is under challenge. Therein, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that such a delay was not satisfactorily explained by the claimant-appellant and accordingly dismissed the application by its order dated 20-7-1990.2. The learned Advocate Sri S. Lakshma Reddy appearing for the appellant has pointed out that in view of the settled position in law by the Supreme Court in Dhannulal v. D.P. Vijayvargiya, : AIR1996SC2155 , the order in appeal cannot be sustained. Learned advocate for the respondent Mr. R. Anandha Mohana Rao has left the matter to the Court for decision having due regard to the implication of such a precedent by the Supreme Court.3. It is true that when the claim petition was filed by the appellant, Section...
The New India Assurance Company Limited Rep. by Its Divisional Manager ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-1996
Reported in: I(1997)ACC476; 1996(4)ALT1059
B.K. Somasekhara, J.1. The award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Anantapur in OP. No. 259 of 1988 dated 17-9-1990 is challenged by the appellant /insurer in regard to the liability placed on it to indemnify the owner of the vehicle in paying the compensation in a motor vehicle claim lodged under Section 110-A of the MV Act, 1939 (for short, the Act), on the ground that the vehicle involved in the accident was not insured with the insurer to be in force for the purpose of indemnifying the owner of the vehicle.2. The matter is dealt with by the Tribunal in para 6 of the Judgment. R.W.1 an officer of the insurer testified on oath positively that the Tractor-Trailor bearing Nos. MYK 5846 and 5847 which were involved in the accident was insured with effect from 6-5-1987 to 5-5-1988 and it was not renewed subsequently and that there was no insurance on the vehicle existing on 13-6-1988, the date of the accident. He also asserted that he was stating so after due verification of the rec...
P. Pedda Nagi Reddy Vs. G. Pullaiah Setty
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-1996
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT761
ORDERA. Hanumanthu, J.1. This revision is directed against the order and decretal order dated 27-9-1991 passed in E.P. No. 348/ 90 in O.S. No. 59 / 77 on the file of the Principal District Munsiff, Kurnool. The petitioner herein is the 1st judgment-debtor and the respondent herein is the decree-holder in the said E.P. No. 348/90 in O.S. No. 59/77.2. The facts, in brief, giving rise to this revision petition are as follows:The respondent herein obtained a money decree against the petitioner and 2 others and in execution of that decree, he brought the immovable properties for sale in E.P. No. 348/90. The 1st judgment-debtor resisted that execution and filed a counter stating that he possesses only 1 acre and 20 cents in S. No. 14 which fell to his share in the partition effected with his father and his brother, that he has no other property except the said extent of Ac. 1.20 cents, that he is living upon agriculture, that he is a small farmer and that he is entitled for the benefits of A...
P. Apparao Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Its Secretary, Ho ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-1996
Reported in: 1998(4)ALT398
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Govt. Pleader for Home.2. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner prays for an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of he respondents in maintaining K.D. Sheet No. 247 against the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary.3. The petitioner, no doubt, was involved in some criminal cases during the year 1976,1979 and 1980. It is required to notice that the petitioner was convicted in CC. Nos. 1483/1976,1583/76 and 181/79 respectively and he was bound over by the Executive Mandal Magistrate, Tadepalligudem in M.C. No. 19/96 by an order Dt. 15-4-1996. Consequent upon the conviction, the History sheet was opened against the petitioner by the respondents in exercise of the power under Standing Order No. 734 of A.P. Police Standing Orders and the same is being continued for all these years. It is important to notice that there are no...
Tadi Adinarayana Reddy Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-1996
Reported in: [1997]90CompCas381(AP)
M.H.S. Ansari, J.1. The petitioner seeks an appropriate writ declaring the inaction on the part of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to take necessary action against respondents Nos. 4 and 5 for their acts of omission and commission as arbitrary and illegal and for a consequential direction to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to forthwith direct prosecution of respondents Nos. 4 and 5 in accordance with law. 2. The petitioner claims to be a joint shareholder along with his maternal uncle, Sri Nallamilli Venkata Reddy. The petitioner along with other family members claims to own 3,723 equity shares in the third respondent company which is incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. The case of the petitioner is that the third respondent company is a public limited company and respondent No. 4 is the chairman and managing director whilst respondent No. 5 is the joint managing director of the third respondent company. It is averred that respondents Nos. 4 and 5 illegally siphoned off monies and through t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »