Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
R. Kamala Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Rep. by Its Divisional M ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1997
Reported in: 1997(4)ALT783
ORDERNeelam Sanjiva Reddy, J.1. The claimant in O.P.No. 32/87 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, preferred this appeal against the order passed on 8-9-1988.2. R. Kamala, the claimant, aged about 28 years and working as a teacher on a monthly remuneration of Rs. 1,520/- at Tandur, sustained grievous injuries on 10-9-86 in a motor vehicle accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry AAA 9720 by its driver. She was admitted in Govt. Hospital at Tandur on 10-9-86 and then referred to Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad for expert treatment. After discharge from Osmania General Hospital on 24-9-86, she was again admitted at the Govt. Hospital, Tandur, on the same day and was treated as in-patient till 2-1-87. The crush injury of her right ankle joint extending from the dorsum of the foot to the sole of the foot measuring 12' x 2' x2' resulted in shortening of foot and its disfigurement and the said permanent disabil...
S. Rajalu and ors. Vs. Government of A.P. Rep. by Its Chief Secretary ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1997
Reported in: 1997(5)ALT358
ORDERSyed Saadatulla Hussaini, J.Heard Mr. S. Ramachandra Rao, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Advocate General for the Government.1. Since the arguments in the W.P.M.Ps. and the Writ petition are one and the same, the main writ petition is being disposed of.2. The petitioners seek an appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the Rules issued by the Government in G.O.Ms. No. 137, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Mandal-I) Department, dated 27-3-1997 and the amended G.O.Ms. No. 171, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Mandal-I) Department dated 19-4-1997 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14, 16, 40 and 243F of Constitution of India and also violative of provisions of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.3. It is submitted by the petitioners in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (Act No. 13 of 1994) ...
Syed Askari HussaIn Jafferi and anr. Vs. District Collector, Ranga Red ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1997
Reported in: 1998(4)ALD581
ORDER1. Heard Sri E. Kalyan Ram, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri R. Subash Reddy, learned Counsel for the respondents 3 to 5.2. The petitioners have questioned the action of the Respondent - Mandal RevenueOfficer and the District Collector in B-5128/90 as illegal and arbitrary. Sri R. Subash Reddy, learned Counsel for the respondents has raised serious objections to the very maintainability of the above writ petition with respect to the relief as prayed for. According to learned Counsel for the respondents, Sri R. Subash Reddy, no details or particulars have been furnished by the petitioners as to the proceedings questioned by them in the above writ petition. The learned Counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the proceedings in question are one relating to a notice in File B1/5128/90 dated 11-1-1993 issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer - Respondent No.2 for evicting respondents 6 to 9 from their dwelling house.3. It is thus apparent that what the petitioners ha...
J. Prakash Vs. State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD602; 1998(1)ALT(Cri)116; 1998CriLJ3108
1. This appeal is directed against the Judgement dated 24.06.1993 in Excise Case No. 7 of 1993 on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge, Chittoor whereunder the appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 18(c) read with Section 20(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and also to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default to pay fine to suffer simple imprisonment for three months.2. The case of the prosecution as revealed from the evidence on record is as follows:i) P.W.4 who worked previsouly as Excise Sub-Inspector, Chittoor, went on raids to Rasanapalli village onl 8.12.1992 along with P.W.3 the Excise Head Constable and the panch witnesses P.Ws. 1 and 2. At about 5.00 p.m. While therewere at a distance of two furlongs southwest of Harijanawada near the Railway track, they noticed the appellant-accused coming towards Rasanapalli with a plastic bag,M.O.1, in...
Nagam Gangadhar Vs. the State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1997
Reported in: 1997(6)ALD841; 1997(2)ALD(Cri)772; 1998CriLJ2200
ORDER1. The Revision petitioner was charged under Section 376, IPC for sexually assaulting P.W. 3, Karuna, aged four years and convicted thereunder the sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default, to undergo S.I. for two months in S.C. No. 59/92 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, and his appeal to the Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, Crl. A. No. 12/94 having been dismissed by judgment dated 13-12-1995, he is before this Court under Section 397, Cr.P.C. 2. The prosecution case is that on 5-2-1988 at about 12.00 noon P.W. 3, Karuna was taken by the revision-petitioner, a resident of the opposite house, on the pretext of playing. Subsequently, she came out weeping and her private parts were bleeding and she told her mother that she was raped. The mother was aghast at the scene and raised hue and cry. The neighbours gathered and found bleeding from the private parts of Karuna and entered the house of the revision-petitioner...
C. Azaraiah Vs. the Judge, Family Courts and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1997
Reported in: I(1998)DMC313
S. Parvatha Rao, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition seeks a writ of mandamus declaring that the Family Court, Secunderabad, has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit on its file - numbered as O.S. No. 12 of 1997, fend an interlocutory application therein numbered as I.A. No. 293 of 1997. Office had raised an objection that the writ petition was not maintainable. The learned Counsel for the petitioner replied stating that the Family Court passed an order in the said I.A., without any written statement being filed in the said suit and 'started chief-examination' and, hence, the writ petition was maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The learned Counsel submits before us that the contention being advanced in me writ petition is that the said suit was not maintainable because it is beyond the jurisdiction conferred by Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 ('the Act' for short) on the Family Courts.3. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the writ ...
Hassan Ali Khan Vs. the Regional Passport Officer, Passport Office
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1997
Reported in: AIR1998AP232
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner in the instant writ petition prays for issuance of an appropriate writ particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in retaining the passport of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner also prays for issuance of a consequential direction to the respondent to release the passport bearing No. 31575/86 after renewing the same.2. The petitioner in this case, admittedly, is involved in more than one criminal case. Bail is stated to have been granted to him. However, inCr. No. 67/1992 the learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad passed an order granting bail to the petitioner on 1-8-1992 on condition of the petitioner executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each on condition that the petitioner shall appear before the Police, C.C.S. ...
State Vs. B.M.N. Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1997
Reported in: 1998(4)ALD13; 1998(2)ALD(Cri)154
1. The Order in Crl M.P.No.430/94 in STC No. 143/93 on thefile of Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Razole, dated 12-4-1994 dropping the proceedings against the respondents-accused is assailed by the complainant in this appeal.2. The facts in brief are as under : The Inspector of Mines having been appointed by the Central Government purportedly under Section 5(1) of the Mines Act, 1952, filed a complaint against the respondents herein alleging that there was a blow out in the oil well at Komarada-I E-1400-17 Rig., on 20-3-1993 at about 10.30 a.m. that it was inspected by Sri A.K. Megharaj, Deputy Director of Mines Safety (also an Inspector of Mines) on 3rd, 4th 23rd and 24th April, 1993, and Sri S. Venkataraman, Deputy Director of Mines Safety (Mechanical) (also an Inspector of Mines) on 3rd April, 1993 and that the above inspections revealed the contravention of Regulation 44 of the Oil and Mines Regulations, 1984. The relevant portion of the report is extracted below--'In co...
C. Azaraiah Vs. Judge, Family Courts and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1997
Reported in: 1997(5)ALT736; II(1998)DMC114
ORDERS. Parvatha Rao, J.1. The petitioner in this Writ Petition seeks a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the Family Court, Secunderabad, has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit on its file - numbered as O.S.No. 12 of 1997, and an interlocutory application therein numbered as I.A.No. 293 of 1997. Office had raised an objection that the Writ Petition was not maintainable. The learned Counsel for the petitioner replied stating that the Family Court passed an order in the said I.A., without any written statement being filed in the said suit and 'started chief-examination' and, hence, the writ petition was maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The learned Counsel submits before us that the contention being advanced in the Writ Petition is that the said suit was not maintainable because it is beyond the jurisdiction conferred by Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 ('the Act' for short) on the Family Courts.3. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the Wr...
Md. Chand Pasha and ors. Vs. A.P. Foods, I.D.A. Rep. by Its Managing D ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALT196
ORDERT.N.C. Rangarajan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondent to regularise the services of the petitioners in regular cadres according to G.O.Ms. No. 212, dated 22-4-1994. According to the petitioners they were appointed in March 1991 but their services were terminated in the year 1993 arbitrarily and in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short 'the Act')- The petitioners are workmen employed in the factory run by the 25 respondent-organisation which is under the purview of the Societies Registration Act. The petitioners questioned the termination before the Labour Court, Hyderabad and by an Award dated 25-8-1995 the Labour Court directed the respondent-authority to reinstate them in service. To-day I have dismissed Writ Petition No. 1429 of 1996 confirming the Award of the Labour Court. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that since the petitioners have completed five years of continuous service that itself i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »