Andhra Pradesh Court December 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.
Kadali Mohanrao and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALD340; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)250
ORDER1. This revision is directed against the order dated 16-10-1997 of the Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Kakinada in Criminal RP.No.879/95 in Sessions CaseNo.313/95.2. The facts giving rise for filing of this revision are as under:The petitioners herein are being tried in S.C.No.313/95 of the offences under Sections 498A and 304B I.P.C. The 2nd respondent herein (hereafter referred as respondent) is the father of the deceased Sathya Kumari. The respondent and his wife were examined as PWs. 1 and 2. They did not give any evidence in support of the prosecution and they have been treated as hostile and cross-examined by the Special Public Prosecutor. But, their son was examined as PW6 and he deposed in support of the prosecution and through him, the documents were also marked. When the matter was at the stage of examination of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the respondent herein filed C.R.P.MP.879/97 under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall and further examine him and his wife (PW2...
Yelamaneni Krishna Kumari Vs. District Collector, Guntur and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)ALD190; 1998(1)ALT290
ORDER1. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.2. The impugned order in this case is the order passed by the 1st respondent dated 31-7-1997 whereunder the revision petition filed by the writ petitioner was rejected on the ground that the petitioner had no locus standi.3. It is necessary to narrate the facts to consider the validity of the impugned order.4. The 4th respondent Smt. A. Parvathi was originally appointed as Fair Price Shop dealer. The petitioner who is one of the contestants to the said appointment, put in an application to the Revenue Divisional Officer, alleging that the educational certificate produced by the 4th respondent was false and requested to conduct an enquiry into the matter. The matter was therefore referred to the Mandal Revenue Officer and he submitted a report. On the basis of the said report, the Revenue Divisional Officer by an order dated 16-5-1996 set said the appointment of the 4th respondent. Aggrieved by the above said order, the 4th...
D. Satyavathi Vs. S. Appa Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1997
Reported in: 1(1998)ACC478
B.K. Somasekhara, J.1. The award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ongole in O.P. No. 123/87 dated 23.7.1990 as to the adequacy of the compensation awarded to the appellant, who was the petitioner in the competition is challenged. The fourth respondent is the owner of the lorry AAN 2319 involved in the accident and the 3rd respondent is its insurer. Originally the claim petition was filed against respondents 1 and 2 as the owner and the insurer and it was dismissed.2. The Tribunal held that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry. It was further held that the appellant sustained a crush injury to the left hand and that it was amputated upto the root of the shoulder and a sum of Rs. 3,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs. 7,000/- for treatment and nourishment, Rs. 19,000/- for permanent disability, in all Rs. 34,000/- were awarded as against Rs. 70,000/- claimed. The liability to pay the compensation was made joint and several on the part of th...
S. Ranga Reddy Vs. Land Acquisition Officer and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD375; 1998(4)ALT515
ORDER1. The order of the learned Sub-Judge, Mahabubnagar in I.A.No.61/97 in O.P.No.30/86 dated 30-6-1997 is challenged by the petitioner, who is the decree holder in O.P.No.30/86. The decree in O.P.No.30/86 arose out of a land acquisition dispute. It was confirmed by this Court in appeal and further on by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the subsequent proceedings. The petitioner presented a cheque petition to withdraw the compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- and it was ordered. Respondent No.1, the Land Acquisition Officer filed the application I.A.No.61/97 and objected for payment of the amount by way of interest on solatium and on additional amount awarded and the income tax on total interest to be deducted at 10% under Section 194A of the Income Tax Act. Reliance was placed on Tehri Hydel Development Corporation v. S.P. Singh and others, 1997 (1) CCC 50 (SC). The rule laid down therein was that the claimants in land acquisition are not entitled to interest on solatium and the additional sum a...
S. Papi Reddy Vs. Rayalaseema Farmers Service Co-op. Society Ltd. and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1997
Reported in: 1997(6)ALT702; [2000]102CompCas45(AP)
Bilal Nazki, J.1. The petitioner had obtained a loan of Rs. 82,500 being a small farmer from the respondent society for purchase of a tractor on May 8, 1979. After obtaining the loan the petitioner purchased tractor bearing No. APD 6427. The petitioner submits that because of drought and some other accompanying circumstances the loan amount could not be repaid by him in seven instalments which was the requirement when the loan was granted to the petitioner. The last instalment was payable at the end of year 1986, i.e., June 30, 1986. By January 10, 1986, the petitioner had paid an amount of Rs. 93,074. The petitioner further states that the State of Andhra Pradesh has suffered last several years continuously because of floods and cyclones and this aspect was considered by the Government of Andhra Pradesh and it was pleased to provide concessions to the agriculturists so that their burden of debt gets lessened. G.O. Ms. No. 7 (F and A) (Co-op. III), dated January 5, 1987, was issued by ...
P.S. Prasad Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD554; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)132; 1998(1)ALT(Cri)268
ORDER1. This is an application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for the records in Crime No.36/94 on the file of the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Senior Executive Officer, C.I.D., Hyderabad and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary as the same resulted in humiliation and undue harassment to the petitioner,2. The facts leading to the filing of this petition are that the Director (Vigilance and Enforcement), Hyderabad addressed a letter to the Director General (V&E;) and Ex-Officio Principal Secretary to Government, G.A.D, (V&E;) Department, Hyderabad, requesting him to register a case of attempting to cheating and forgery under Sections 417, 468, 471 and 420 r/w 511 I.P.C. against the petitioner. The sum and substance of the above letter is that M/s. Goldstone Exports (P) Limited established in April' 92 is owned by one Mr. Sashi Kumar S/o Sri L.J. Victor, a police officer and brother-in-law of the petitioner herein and the paid-up capital of the company was inves...
Hyder MohiuddIn Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1997
Reported in: 1998(4)ALD166; 1998(1)ALT1
1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner in public interest. He claimed in the writ petition that he is an agent of the Life Insurance Corporation of India. However, it was pointed out by the learned Counsel for the respondent that the copy of the affidavit served on him shows that the petitioner has claimed to be a Policy holder of Life Insurance Corporation of India.2. The main contention of the writ petitioner is that the Life Insurance Corporation has been established not only to secure the Life Insurance business but to secure it to the best advantage of the community. It is stated that the respondent Corporation is bound to secure for insured persons the rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India and the privileges promised under the Directive Principles. It is further stated that the Corporation is conducting the Life Insurance business with a view to secure maximum benefits for the Corporation and it is blind to the interest of the Policy holders. He submits that, a...
Kedar Bhatia Vs. Lingarkar Panduranga Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-08-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD224; 1998(2)ALT105
1. This Civil Revision petition under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960is filed by the tenant. He is aggrieved by an order passed by the appellate authority dismissing Rent Appeal No. 127 of 1989 preferred by him and confirming the order of eviction granted by the learned Principal Rent Controller, SecunderabadinRC.No.303 of 1983.2. The respondents herein filed eviction petition against the petitioner under Section 10(3)(a)(i)(b) and Section 10(2)(i) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, for short 'the Act' on the ground of requirement of additional accommodation and wilful default. The respondents are the land-lords of the building bearing No.4200 and 4201 situated at Secunderabad which correspond to New Nos.7-1-589, 590, 591, 415 and 416, for short 'the petitioner premises'. The building consists of ground floor and first floor. It is their case that originally one Jadavji Toprani was the tenant of the said bui...
Chowdary and Company Vs. Appana Maha Sada Siva Suryanarayana Rao Alias ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-08-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD435; 1998(1)ALT639
ORDER1. The petitioner is the tenant in this civil revision petition filed under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, for short 'the Act'. He is aggrieved by an order passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada in RCA No.33 of 1982, dt 4-2-1994 reversing the order in RCC No. 84 of 1980 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Vijayawada dated 23-1-1982.2. The petitioner is the tenant and the respondent is the landlord. The respondent herein filed petition under Section 10(2)(1) of Act XV of 1960, seeking eviction of the petitioner herein from the petition schedule premises on the ground that the petitioner herein had committed wilful default in payment of rent and also on the ground that the petitioner herein had secured alternative building bearing No. 11-62-67 in the same road very near to the petition schedule premises and is carrying on business exclusively in the building bearing No. 11-62-67. Thus the respondent her...
Syndicate Bank, Kurichedu, Prakasham Dist. Vs. Induri Guravareddy and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-08-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD530; 1998(1)ALT735
ORDER1. The instant civil revision petition is filed by the plaintiff/decree holder against the order dated: 6-8-1993 dismissing the petition filed under Order XXXIV Rule 5 of The Code of Civil Procedure. The petitioner herein having obtained the preliminary decree in O.S.No.33/89 filed I.A.No.1104/91 praying to pass final decree in terms of the preliminary decree and to direct to bring the petition schedule properties to sale for realisation of the decretal amount in the suit, in pursuance of the preliminary decree dated: 16-1-1991.2. The petitioner herein filed O.S.No.33/89 basing on a simple mortgage and the trial Court passed preliminary decree on 16-1-1991 by granting six months time to the respondents/defendants for redumption of mortgage properly under the said decree. The respondents/defendants failed to pay any amount whatsoever to satisfy the decree. The petitioner left with no other alternative and in order to realise the decretal amount filed the application to pass final d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »