Andhra Pradesh Court February 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.
Md. Usman Vs. Md. Anwar Baigh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1996
Reported in: 1996(4)ALT105
B.K. Somasekhara, J.1. The judgment of the learned District Judge, Krishna district, Machilipatnam in A.S.No. 101 of 1986 and the cross objections dated 27-2-1987 are in challenge in this appeal. Appellants are the Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in O.S.No. 90 of 1975 and the Respondents No. 1 to 7 were the Plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 8 in the suit and Respondent No. 1 is the son of Plaintiff No.l Ibrahim Beigh. Respondents N0.8 and 9 are the legal representatives of Plaintiff No. 8, who died pending suit. The convenience warrants the reference to the parties as Plaintiffs and Defendants as they occupied in the trial Court.2. Originally, Plaintiff No. 1 viz., Ibrahim Beigh filed the suit and on his death the other Plaintiffs were brought on record as his legal representatives. The Defendants No. 2 and 3 Jaibunnisa and Sabrunnessa are the sisters of Plaintiff No.l. Khadar Baigh and Khatija Bibi are their parents. Defendant No. 1 is the husband of Defendant No. 2. Plaintiffs No. 2 and 8 are the sons an...
The Catholic Syrian Bank Limited, Rep. by Its Chief Manager Vs. Sree J ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1996
Reported in: 1996(3)ALT45
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. These appeals arise out of the common order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Jangaon, Warangal District in/I.A.45/1995 in O.S.20/1994,1.A.197/ 1995 in O.S.19/1995 and I.A.46/1995 in O.S.4/1995 rejecting the petitioner's applications for grant of an order under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 C.P.C. seeking attachment of the amounts due and payable to the respondents/defendants by the South Central Railway and to issue an order prohibiting the Railway from making payment to the defendants pending disposal of the suits.2. For the purpose of executing the contract work awarded by the South Central Railway, the respondents approached the appellant-bank for furnishing deferred payment bank guarantee to Vijaya Bank Limited which, in turn, furnished a bank guarantee to the company which sold the equipment namely, three tippers and one excavator. The said equipment was hypothecated to the appellant-bank. It is not in dispute that the respondents defaulted in the payment of the ...
The Arya Vysya Sangam, Rep. by Its President Vs. the Settlement Office ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)ALT346
ORDERSyed Saadatulla Hussain, J.1. Mr. V. Rajagopal Reddy appearing for Mr. D. Sudhakar Rao submits that petitioner in W.P.No. 1383/90 is an association under the name and style of 'Arya Vysya Sangham', New Town, Anantapur, represented by its President , Sri D. Viswanatha Gupta. The said association is dealing with the welfare of Vysya community is general and other communities. It is submitted that Acs. 2-79 cents in S.No. 86/2 of Papampet village, Anantapur District was communal lands being used for the cremation and burial of dead bodies originally belonging to Vysya and Brahmin community and later it became burial ground for the entire Hindu community. In G.O.Ms.No. 518, Revenue, dated 28-5-1974, the above said land of Acs. 2-79 cents was transferred from assessed waste to the burial ground Poramboke. In pursuance of the orders in the said G.O. the Tahsildar directed the Revenue Inspector to mutate the said lands in the name of the above said Association., and also the petitioner i...
Kommineni Seetharamaiah Vs. Kommineni Punnaiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-1996
Reported in: 1996(3)ALT271
B. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal against dismissal of his suit for specific performance of contract for sale laid in O.S.No. 280/1979 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Guntur. I refer the parties as arrayed in the suit.2. The plaintiff had instituted the above suit claiming the relief of specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 12-11-1978. The defendants are father and son respectively. The suit schedule property is the agricultural land ad measuring 87 cts. The suit was contested and the defendants did not admit the execution of the said agreement, but on the other hand contended that there was no consensus ad idem for entering into the suit agreement and that their signatures were obtained on the blank papers and that in fact, as there were loan transactions, by way of security for repayment of the same, the said papers were obtained. The defendants are poor as compared to the plaintiff and his father, as the latter had substantial p...
Ghousia Sultana Alias Ghousia Begum and Etc. Etc. Vs. Mohd. Ghouse Bai ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-1996
Reported in: 1996(1)ALD(Cri)534; 1996(1)ALT940; 1996(1)ALT(Cri)608; 1996CriLJ2973; II(1996)DMC115
K.M. Agarwal, J.1. On the basis of recommendation made by a learned single Judge of this Court, the following question came up for consideration before a Division Bench : 'Whether the High Court can invoke its inherent powers conferred under Section 482, Cr.P.C., and grant permission to the parties to compound the non-compoundable offences, particularly the offence punishable under Section 498A, I.P.C., to secure ends of justice keeping in view the statutory bar provided under Section 320(9), Cr.P.C. ?' After considering various case laws and noticing the divergence of judicial opinion, the Division Bench came to the conclusion that : 'The divergence of judicial opinion on the question whether a non-compoundable offence could be allowed to be compounded by the High Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482, Cr.P.C., needs to be resolved by a Full Bench as the question arises very frequently.' This is how the matter has come up before this Full Bench. 2. Most of the case...
Kasireddi Narayana Reddy Vs. Kasireddi Pulla Reddi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-1996
Reported in: 1996(3)ALT274
K.M. Agarwal, J.1. Having lost his suit for declaration and possession of the suit schedule property in the trial Court and the first appeal before a learned single Judge of this Court, the plaintiff has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal.2. Without going into the merits of the appeal, we are of the view that it is liable to be dismissed on the short ground that the plaint disclosed no cause of action. As disclosed by the impugned judgment and also stated by the learned counsel for the appellant, the suit schedule property initially belonged to one Nagendrappa. He executed a will on 11-10-1935, creating life interest in respect of the suit schedule property in favour of his wife and the remainder after the death of the wife to one Naganna. Nagendrappa, the testator died on 30-10-1935 and, thereafter, his wife came into possession of the property under the will. The reversioner Naganna died in 1945 during the life time of the limited owner. The plaintiff-appellant obtained a sale deed...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Rep. by Its Branch Manager Vs. P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-1996
Reported in: II(1996)ACC143; 1996(1)ALT946
ORDERNeelam Sanjiva Reddy, J. 1. These appeals have been filed by the second respondent-insurer in O.Ps 87, 89 and 90 of 1988 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-District Court, Nellore, against the common order passed on 25th October, 1990. 2. Posini Venkaiah, Doddala Seshamma and Doddala Tirupalu, doing business in vegetables and milk, were travelling with their vegetable bags in tractor-trailer AAN 2204 and AAN 2335 on 7-2-1988 from their village Chenchuganipalem to Kavali after paying fare and freight charges. The tractor-trailer met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving resulting in the death of Posini Venkaiah and Doddala Seshamma and injuries to Doddala Tirupalu. The dependants of the two deceased persons and the injured filed the above O.Ps separately claiming compensation. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs. 67,000/- to the claimants in O.P.No. 87 of 1988, Rs. 79,500/- to the claimants in O.P.No. 9...
Secretary, A.P. Social Welfare Residential Educational Institutions So ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1996
Reported in: 2000(6)ALT763
P.S. Mishra, C.J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Counsel for the respondent.2. It is stated in the impugned judgment that averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition were not countered by the respondents-appellants. The averments mentioned in the impugned order are that the writ petitioner-respondent was appointed as Auxiliary Nurse-Midwife on 25-7-1989 by the District Collector, who was the appointing authority at that time and in-charge of the A. P. Social Welfare Residential Educational Institutions Society. She was sponsored by the Employment Exchange and was selected by the Selection Committee after holding interview. However, she was kept on daily wages. In the counter-affidavit, which is on the record, however, these averments appear to have been disputed in the following words:-'It is not true to say that the petitioner was appointed through the procedure. In fact she was not appointed in accordance with the recruitmental proced...
Bolisetti Bhavannarayana @ Venkata Bhavannarayana Vs. Kommuru Vullakki ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1996
Reported in: 1996(1)ALD(Cri)530; 1996(1)ALT917
K.M. Agarwal, J. 1. Neither the order of reference made by the learned single Judge, nor that made by the Division Bench gives any definite indication as to the specific question or questions referred to the Full Bench. The learned single Judge felt that:'There is a conflict in the Divisional Bench decisions of this Court in Ramakistaiah v. Yellappa : AIR1959AP653 and P. Ramana Reddy v. K. Rukminamma (1968 (1) An. W.R. 221) with regard to applicability of Explanation (i) to Section 13(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in deciding whether a document is a promissory note within the definition of Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act'. The Divisional Bench also felt that there was a divergence of opinion as to the nature of the suit document, which required to be settled at rest by a Full Bench in view of its general importance. To quote the words of the Division Bench: 'As stated supra, there are conflicting views expressed in the two earlier judgments i.e., Ramakistiah's ...
Ch. Venkata Subrahmanya Babu @ Venkata Subrahmanya Gupta and anr. Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)ALT964
ORDERS.R. Nayak, J.1. The Revision petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No. 686 of 1989 pending on the file of the Court of the subordinate Judge, Vijayawada. The suit is filed for prepetual injunction and damages. The plaintiffs filed LA.No. 5074 of 1994 under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment of the relief praying the court to permit the petitioner-plaintiffs to seek the relief of recovery of possession of the suit premises. The said application was rejected by the learned trial Judge by the order under Revision.2. Heard the learned counsel for the Revision petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent-defendant.3. Learned counsel for the Revision petitioners would contend that the learned trial Judge is not justified in rejecting the application on the ground that the amendment, if allowed, would alter the very nature of the suit. The learned counsel would further submit that the reason given by the trial Judge to reject the application on the ground that the applicat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »