Andhra Pradesh Court August 1997 Judgments

Smt. Chunnu Bai Vs. K. Ramulu and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(5)ALT785

Y.V. Narayana, J.1. This revision is filed against the order dated 18-2-1994 passed in R.A. No. 233/1989 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Hyderabad.2. Landlady is the revision petitioner herein. She filed R.C. No. 731 of 1986 on the file of the III Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, seeking eviction of the deceased tenant, who died during the pendency of the proceedings before the Court below, Under Section 10 (3) (c) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short, 'the Act'). The said petition was dismissed holding that the requirement of the petition schedule premises as additional accommodation is not bona fide. Aggrieved by the said order, the landlady carried the matter in appeal which was also dismissed confirming the findings of the Rent Controller. Hence, the revision.3. The brief facts of the case are as follows. The landlady is residing in the building bearing Municipal No. 3-3-65 and 66 situated at Rajmohalla, ...

Patti Eswara Reddy Vs. Superintendent of Police and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(4)ALT284

ORDERM.H.S. Ansari, J.1. Heard Sri A. Prabakara Sarma, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home.2. The petitioner seeks a direction for closing the Rowdy Sheet No. 209 dt. 1-10-1982 being maintained by the Yerraguntla Police Station, Cuddapah District.3. On behalf of respondents, the fourth respondent has filed a counter-affidavit wherein it is stated that the petitioner is involved in acts of breach of peace and several crimes have been registered against the petitioner. The particulars thereof have been furnished in the counter-affidavit Which are as under:(1) Yerraguntla P.S. Cr. No. 90/80 Under Section 379 IPC.(2) Yerraguntla P.S. Cr. No. 100/80 Under Sections 147, 148, 324, 307 IPC.(3) Yerraguntla P.S.Cr. No. l02/80 Under Section 107 Cr.P.C. in which the petitioner was bound over Under Section 107 Cr.P.C.It is also stated the the petitioner has been involving himself in lawless acts and on 15-02-1997 the petitioner was arrested and sent on remand ...

P. Jogan Mohan Vs. Manager, Liption India Ltd. and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The complaint CD 77/90 was filed by a poultry farmer against the first opposite party i.e. Lipton (India) Ltd., from whom the complainant purchased feed concentrate and 2) against M/s. Venus Marketing through whom the first opposite party sold the feed concentrate claiming a total compensation of Rs. 8,92,197/-. 2. 1t is alleged in the complaint that based on the general reputation of the first opposite party and from the experience of previous supplies, the complainant purchased feed concentrate on 3.5.1990 and fed the flock consisting of 1010 Babcock layers after culling, 4352 Layer Growers in their 18th week, parent stock of broiler parents of 641 females/and 91 males/and 1921 cockerels, the total value of the flock being Rs. 2,26,362/-. 3. According to the complainant he purchased the feed concentrate on 3.5.1990 and fed the same to the birds with effect from 3.5.1990.4 days after the feed contrate was fed, it was noticed that the mortality rate ...

Air Commodore Satyanarayana Vs. L.V. Prasad Eye Institute and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The complainant a retired Air Commodore, aged about 75 years having an industry at Neredmet, consulted on 21.5.1988 the Doctor at L.V. Prasad Eye Institute and paid a sum of Rs. 80/as evidenced by Ex. A-1, and on examination the Doctor diagnosed that the complainant was having cataracts in both the eyes more in the right eye than the left. Thereafter he consulted again on 14.10.1988 as evidenced by Ex. A-2 receipt and on 16.10.1988 as evidenced by Ex. A- 3 receipt for Rs. 3,350/- and was admitted on 16.10.1988 and Dr. Chandrasekhar performed cataract operation at 8.30 a.m. on 17.10.1988 and implanted a lens (Intraocular), and the complainant was advised to stay in the institute for one more day for post operative care. But the complainant on the very next day morning of operation developed head-ache and severe pain in the right eye and was again taken to operation theatre and was re-operated and a vitrectomy was performed by removal of intraocular le...

Srikishan Nursing Home Vs. Mrs. P. Yasoda and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 29.9.1995 of the District Forum, Warangal passed in C.D.374 of 1992 directing the opposite party No. 1 to pay sum of Rs. 65,000/- towards mental agony and costs of Rs. 1,000/-. 2. The facts of the case in brief as alleged in the complaint are that one B. Aga Reddy, the husband of the 1st complainant and father of complainants 2 and 3 was brought to the Nursing Homei.e. O.P. No. 1 on 8.3.1992 and the said patient was referred to opposite party No. 2 fortreatment and he in turn had ordered certain tests to be conducted. It is alleged that due to negligent prescription of certain medicines to the patient, there was reaction which led to complications. It was further alleged that the opposite parties have started some other treatment which had further deteriorated the condition of the patient with the result the opposite party No. 2 had called in Dr. P. Prathap who advised the patient to be shifted t...

Vani Agencies Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The complainant in C.D. 253 /93 who is a dealer in electric and electronic goods took two policies from New India Assurance Company Ltd., i.e. first opposite party for a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs for the period from 2.3.1993 to 1.5.1993 and another for a sum of Rs. 12 lakhs covering the period from 12.4.1993 to 11.4.1994. The business premises wherein the stocks are kept including the entire stocks alongwith furniture and fittings were reduced to ashes in the fire accident that occurred on 22.4.1993 at about 11.30 night. The fire tenders attended and with great difficulty could put down the fire on the next day, and a report was given to the police also and on 23.4.1993 i.e. next day the opposite party Insurance Company was informed about the fire accident and the claim was submitted estimating the loss at Rs. 12,91,136/-. Although the opposite party Insurance Company appointed joint Surveyors and after lapse of six months an Investigator Sri M.V. Subba Red...

H.S. Gururaja Rao Vs. Hindustan Motors Ltd. and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The complainant purchased one Hindustan Ambassador Deluxe Sedan car in June, 1989 for a sum of Rs. 1,18,694/- manufactured by first opposite party through its dealer i.e. fourth opposite party i.e. Auto Pradeep, Hyderabad, and took a comprehensive insurance policy on 6.6.1989 for Rs. 1,20,000/- with the second opposite party, and the third opposite party is the General Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Within a month of supply, even before the permanent registration was allotted to the car, the axle broke down and on a representation made by the complainant, the first opposite party replaced the car with a new one and the second opposite party endorsed the insurance coverage to the new replaced vehicle. Even before the expiry of period of third free service on 11.2.1990 at 5.45 p.m. while the vehicle was being taken out from the garage at the complainant's house as soon as an ignition key was applied, the vehicle caught fire preceded by an exp...

A. Goverdhan Reddy Vs. Superintendent of Police, Allahabad and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(5)ALD761; 1997(2)ALD(Cri)568; 1998CriLJ561

P.S. Mishra, C.J.1. Petitioner-appellant was allegedly arrested on 11-4-1997 for the alleged offence under Section 8(b) of the A.P. Prohibition Act, produced before a Magistrate and remanded to police custody for being produced on 15-4-1997. On 15-4-1997, he and other co-accused complained to the Magistrate that they were beaten by S.I. of Police, Nirmal (T). Magistrate in his order recorded as follows : '........ A1 to A4 have stated that they have been beaten by S.I. of Police, Nirmal (T). On 11-4-1997, A2, A3, A4 have also stated they have already been treated by the civil Assistant Surgeon, Nirmal Government Civil Hospital. In the circumstances of the case A1, A2, A3 are referred to Government Hospital for treatment. A4 is remanded to judicial custody till 29-4-1997.' 2. Making the grievance that inspite of the above complaint before the Magistrate no case has been registered by the S.I. of Police (respondent No. 3), petitioner-appellant sought for an appropriate direction for regi...

P.N. Swamy, Labour Liberation Front, Mahaboobnagar Vs. Station House O ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(1)ALD755; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)283; 1998(2)ALT(Cri)411

ORDERY. Bhaskara Rao, J 1. 'Mehaboob-ki-Mehindi' is an infamous redlight area lying in the thickly populated and business locality near Charminar where the dehumanising carnal trade has been flourishing for several decades. Though flesh trade was, prohibited by the law enacted as early as in 1956, prostitution is being carried on under the very nose of the police. However, the misery of the unfortunate sex-girls in the area was brought to the notice of the Court by a write up in the Telugu Daily 'Eenadu' followed by the letter dated 06-03-1997 of a public spirited person by name P.M. Swamy of 'Liberation Front'.2. This Court treated the said letter as writ petition and the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad city (second respondent) was directed to cause enquiry through the Superintendent of Police for women Protection Cell as to how many women have been kept forcibly in the place called Mehaboob ki Mehndi at Hyderabad and submit a report.3. Accordingly, the Superintendent of Police, Wom...

Masimukkula Narayana and Others Vs. Masimukkula Suryakantham

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(2)ALD132; 1997(5)ALT459

ORDER1. The defendants in OS No.550 of 1992 on the file of the 11 Additional District Munsif at Kakinada are the petitioners herein. They have preferred this revision petition against the order refusing to receive and mark in evidence a Will dated 13-2-1992 on their behalf. The suit filed by the respondent is one for bare injunction against the petitioners in respect of plaint schedule properties. The main defence of the petitioners is that they are the absolute owners of the suit properties by virtue of the Will dated 13-2-1992 said to have been executed by one Veerraju, the husband of the respondent, bequeathing the suit properties in their favour and no injunction can be granted against true owners. When the petitioners sought to mark the said Will during the course of trial the respondent objected to the same on the ground that the Will has to be proved only by way of Probate and a suit for injunction cannot be converted into one for probate. The learned District Munsif, having uph...