Andhra Pradesh Court October 1997 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.
B. Srihari Prasad Vs. Avet Chemicals (P) Ltd. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALD415; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)171; 1999(1)ALT(Cri)110
ORDER1. These Criminal Revision cases raise rather significant issue pertaining to the merits of the rival claims for the custody of a motor vehicle which is produced before a Criminal Court. As the subject-matter of an offence. These revisions arise from a common order dated 29-1.2-1995 of theleamed Sessions Judge, R.R District, Hyderabad, reversing the order of the Magistrate.2. The facts that have given rise to these revisions are these: The Company M/s. Avet Chemicals (P) Ltd., Hyderabad represented by its Sales Director (hereinafter referred as complainant) filed a private complaint against B. Srihari Prasad (hereinafter referred as accused) in the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Hyderabad West & East, under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C. The learned Magistrate referred it to the Police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for investigation. The Police Balangar Police Station registered the complaint as Cr.No. 113/95 under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C. and issued the F.I.R. Durin...
Budati Rajendra Prasad Vs. Kolamudi Ramachandra Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1997
Reported in: 1997(6)ALT819
ORDERB.K. Somasekhara, J.1. Respondent has been served. No representation. Heard on merits. The order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Chirala in C.M.A.No. 15/96 dated 22-2-1997 is challenged. The petitioner is the defendant in O.S. 228/94. The respondent is the plaintiff. The suit was decreed ex parte on 27-1-1995. The petitioner herein filed I.A. 161/95 to set aside the ex parte decree. It was dismissed on 14-8-1996 by the learned Principal District Munsif, Chirala. It was taken in appeal before the learned Subordinate Judge in C.M.A. 15/96. The appeal was allowed setting aside the order of the learned District Munsif and allowing the application with a condition that the petitioner should deposit half of the suit amount within 15 days of the date of the order. Aggrieved by that, the revision is filed.2. The order of the learned Subordinate Judge is perverse in addition to being totally illegal. The ground on which the ex parte decree was challenged was that the petitioner was suffe...
i.V.N. Raju and Others Vs. State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1997
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD585; 1998(1)ALT199
ORDER1. When the WPMPs and thecontempt case came up for hearing before me, the learned Counsel for both parties addressed arguments on the main writ petition itself. As such the writ petition as well as the contempt case is being disposed of finally by this common order.2. This is a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to proceed with the proposed scheme for supply of water to the residents of Vizianagaram town pursuant to the tender notice dated 22-11-1996 issued by the second respondent and declare the same as arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.3. The writ petition is filed by three individuals allegedly for the benefit of about one lakh population covering 37 villages of three mandals of Vizianagaram district. The first petitioner is the Mandal President of S. Kota Mandal Vizianagaram District whereas petitioners 2 and 3 arc agriculturists belonging to Bonangi village. The petitioners claim to repres...
G. Shankar and ors. Vs. Special Cadre Deputy Registrar/District Co-ope ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD69; 1997(6)ALT368
ORDERN.V. Hanumanthappa, J.1. Thiswrit petition is filed challenging the constitutional validity of Section 75(5) of A.P. Co-operative Societies Act and Rule 13 of A.P. Co-operative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1994 and the order of the Co-operative Tribunal, Hyderabad passed in I.A.No.54/94 in CTA No.202/94 dated 18-8-1994 whereby the Tribunal refused to grant any interim order to the petitioners.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that Section 75(5) of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act and Rule 13 of the A.P. Co-operative Tribunal (Procedure) Rides, 1994, are arbitrary, illegal and arc liable to be struck down. Under Section 75(5) of the Act, the Legislature cannot delegate its essential legislative function to the Subordinate Legislature or leave it for the purpose of delegated legislature. Rule 13 of the Rules enables the Single Member to hear and dispose of the case at admission stage. Rule 13 of the Rules offends the very purpose of substituting Section 75 of the...
Lingam Govindarao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD525; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)48; 1998(1)ALT(Cri)206
ORDER1. This Criminal Revision case is directed against the judgment dated 8-3-1996 of the learned Sessions Judge, Srikakulam in Crl. Appeal No.83 of 1992 on his file, wherein he had confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on the revision petitioner/accused in S.C.No.24 of 1992 on the file of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Srikakulam. The revision petitioner/accused No. 1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and also to pay a fine of Rs.200/- and in default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 366 of 1PC and the revision petitioner was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- and in default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonmentfor one month for the offence under Section 376 of IPC.2. The facts, in brief, are as under:The complainant-PWl, Sri Simhadri Annajirao is a resident of Srikakulam. PW2, Simhadri Ramanamma is his eldest daughte...
G.V. Sekhara Rao Vs. Registrar A.U. Waltair and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD689
1. In all these Writ Petitions common question of law is involved as to whether the non-teaching staff of Andhra University is entitled to continue in service upto the age of 60 years ?2. The Petitioners are appointed in various non-teaching posts and working in the Andhra University and also the constituent institutions under the management and control of Andhra University.3. It is the case of the Petitioners that originally, the service conditions of the non-teaching stair employed by the University were governed by the provisions of Andhra University Act. The University prescribed the age of superannuation in respect of non-teaching staff at 60 and teaching staff also at 60 years. But, subsequently the age of superannuation in respect of non-teaching staff was reduced to 58 in 1989. It is the case of the Petitioners that the University cannot differentiate between the teaching staff and non-teaching staff in respect of service conditions and therefore the non-teaching staff is also ...
Kalegara Naga Subba Lakshmi Vs. Meduri Subbanna and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALD93; 1998(1)ALT825
1. This appeal and the CRP are being disposed of by this common judgment as they arise out of the self-same execution proceeding between the same parties.2. A.S.No.2769 of 1992 is directed against the order dated 22-6-1992 passed in E.A.No.117 of 1991 in E.P.N'o.16 of 1991 in O.S.No.149 of 1990 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kovvur whereby the claim-petition filed by the first respondent under Order 21 Rule 58 C.P.C. was allowed and the attachment over the schedule property was raised. C.R.P.No.2744 of 1992 is directed against the consequential over passed in E.P.No.16 of 1991 in O.S.No.149/90 dismissing the E.P. The facts leading to the appeal and revision may be stated briefly.3. The parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in A.S.No.2769 of 1992. The second respondent was the owner of an extent of Acs.2.38 cents of agricultural land which was leased out by him to the first respondent. The second respondent filed a petition against the first respondent for eviction from...
Dr. M. Mohan Babu Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Commissioner of Police, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD135; 1998CriLJ457
ORDER1. This Court's jurisdiction is invoked by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to decide as to where an individual's freedom ends and the State's power begins. This Court is confronted with the duty imposed upon it by the Constitution. The petitioner through his private Secretary submitted an application to the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, Hyderabad, on 16-9-1997 requesting him to grant necessary permission to observe fast on October 2, 1997 at NTR Ghat, Tank-bund, Hyderabad, from 6-30 a.m. to 8-30 p.m. (for one day) against political corruption. Similar request is also made on behalf of the petitioner, through another letter, addressed to the Chairman, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority.2. The petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition briefly gives his personal background and details about his career in the film world and association with late Sri N. T. Rama Rao. It is stated that he has decided to launch a campaign ...
G.R.R. Chowdhary and anr. Vs. State Transport Authority, Rep. by Its S ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: 1997(6)ALT732
ORDERT.N.C. Rangarajan, J.1. This Writ Petition is directed against the notices issued by the Assistant Motor Vehicles Inspector charging the petitioner for overloading his vehicle. According to the report when a check was made on 14-3-97 it was found that the gross laden weight was 24,415 Kgs. in the case of vehicle No. AP 31 /U2521 and 25,490 Kgs. in the case of vehicle No. AP 31/U2515. The Inspector was of the opinion that these vehicles are overloaded, taking the gross permissible weight as 22,000 Kgs. only, and relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in N. Venkateswara Rao and Ors. v. S.T.A. and Ors., 1997 (1) SCALE 176.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners points out that the decision of the Supreme Court was only with reference to fixing the gross permissible weight for the purpose of registration and once the vehicle has been registered it is only the registered weight which is relevant to find out whether there is any overloading.3. The respondent has not filed any co...
Dilip Kumar M. Patel Vs. Kanugu Shankar and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: 1997(5)ALT682
ORDERV. Rajagopala Reddy, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No.15 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif, Medak, is the petitioner. His father was initially the tenant and the father of the 1st respondent and the grand-father of the 2nd respondent and the father-in-law of the 3rd respondent, was the landlord of the premises. The premises was obtained on lease on executing a lease deed dt.12-9-1971, on a monthly rent basis and the father of the petitioner started a Saw-Mill business therein. After his father's death, the petitioner has been in possession of the premises by paying monthly rent to the respondents, who became the absolute owners after the death of the father of the 1st respondent. Alleging that the respondents threatened the petitioner to close the business and vacate the premises, the petitioner filed the suit for perpetual injunction and pending the suit he filed LA. No. 65/96 seeking temporary injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the possession and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »