Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
Voona Surya Rao Vs. Salina Sarathi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: 1997(5)ALT690
D.H. Nasir, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner. Respondents not represented.2. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order passed in E.P.No. 51/90 in O.S.No. 95/87 dated 3-7-1995 holding that the Execution Petitioner failed to establish that the Judgment-Debtor was in possession of sufficient means for satisfying the decretal dues and hence not liable to be arrested.3. The Executing Court in the 3rd part of para 11 of the impugned order observed that the Decree Holder in his cross-examination admitted that the Judgment-Debtor was a small farmer, that he was doing business in Kanchili with a daily turn over of Rs. 10,000/- and that the was paying Sales-tax as well as Income-tax for his business. The learned Judge further observed that the burden of proof shifted to the Decree Holder to show that the annual income of the 1st Judgment-Debtor other than agricultural income was more than Rs. 1,200/-; but the Decree Holder merely stated in his examinati...
Madhavan Nayar Vs. Bathina Hanumantha Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: 1999(5)ALD133a; 1999(4)ALT60
ORDER1. The judgment of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Ongole in RCA No.13/94, dated 3-3-1997 is in challenge. The petitioner is the respondent in the appeal. The respondent had filed an appeal against the petitioner under Section 20 of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act') before the learned Rent Controller-cum-Principal District Munsif, Ongole in RCC No.33/88 on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent and bona fide requirement of premises for personal occupation under Sections 10(2)(i) and 3(c) of the Act which was resisted by the petitioner. The respondent examined himself as PW1 and the petitioner was examined as RW1 and Exs.A1 to A18 were marked. After hearing both the sides, the learned Rent Controller accepted both the grounds for eviction set up by the respondent. But he came to the conclusion that since the rate of rent pleaded by the respondent was Rs.1,500/- per mensem, by virtue of G.O. Ms. No.636, dated 29-12-1983...
Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Rep. by Its Deputy Secretary ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-1997
Reported in: 1997(5)ALT820
Lingaraja Rath, J.1. The Central Government is in appeal against the order of the learned single Judge holding that a notice to be required to be given to show cause prior to any order is passed Under Section 10(b) of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976. The learned single Judge in passing the order relied upon the judgment in W.P. No. 9677 of 1985 dated 19-12-1985 in which similar view had been taken.2. Mr. R.S. Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for the Central Government has brought to our notice the fact that the order of the learned single Judge in the earlier case was subjected to Civil Appeal No. 3608 of 1989 in which the Apex Court passed the following order:-' In Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 2693 of 1990, this Court directed that the period of three months indicated by the High Court for issuing fresh notice shall commence from the date of this Court. In the same terms, we direct that the appellant-Government shall have three months to issue a fresh notice comm...
Apsrtc, Hyd., and anr. Vs. Challa Venkatesh Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALD87; 1998(2)ALT324
ORDER1. These proceedings arise out of two writ petitions i.e. W.P.No.2002/96 and W.P. No.3489/96. C.C.No.29/97 is filed by Challa Rajaylakshmi complaining the dis-obedience of the order of this Court dated 11-3-1996 passed in W.P.No. 2002/96 in which there is a direction of this Court to the following effect:'The respondents are hereby directed to . appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground on a suitable post, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order'2. C.C.No.517/97 is filed by Challa Venkateswara Rao, complaining the dis-obedience of the order of this Court dated 26-2-1996 passed in W.P. No. 3489/96 which reads as under :'In the circumstance pleaded by the petitioner, I think it appropriate to direct the Respondents 1 & 2 to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to a suitable post on compassionate grounds in the light of the circulars of the Corporation and also in the light of the Judgment of a Division Bench of this Court ...
T. Kausalya Vs. T. Narayana Reddy and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: 1997(6)ALD537; 1997(2)ALD(Cri)740; 1998(1)ALT(Cri)254; 1998CriLJ1795
ORDER1. This revision case is directed against the Judgment of the Family Court at Tirupathi in M.C. No. 7 of 1996 dated 16-2-1996 modifying the order of the II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Tirupathi dated 6-4-1993 in M.C. No. 29 of 1992 by reducing the maintenance amount to Rs. 100/- from Rs. 500/- per month from the date of the Judgment. 2. The facts, in brief, resulting in filing of this revision case are as follows : (i) The revision petitioner Kousalya is the legally wedded wife of the first respondent herein T. Narayana Reddy. (For the sake of convenience they are referred to as wife and husband in this order.). The wife filed M.C. No. 29 of 1992 on the file of the II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Tirupathi, under section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance alleging that she is the legally wedded wife and that her husband having sufficient means neglected and refused to maintain her. The husband filed his counter, but at the time of enquiry the counsel for the husband made an e...
Sunkara Laxmaiah and ors. Vs. Vadlapudi Venkateswara Rao (Died) and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALD249; 1998(1)ALT807
ORDER1. Dl and D2 are the appellants. The plaintiff is the transferee from D3 under a pronote dated 2-11-1968. D3 transferred the pronote in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 4,352/-. The pronote amount under Ex.Al is Rs.3,900/-. The plaintiff claimed relief under Ex.A-1 by virtue of the transfer under Ex.A2 against Dl and D2 executants of the pronote and for an alternate relief against D3. The district Munsif dismissed the suit of the plaintiff against Dl and D2 and decreed the suit against D3. Aggrieved by the same the plaintiff filed an appeal seeking the decree against Dl and D2. The learned district Judge set aside the decree passed by the district Munsif against D3 though there was no appeal by D3, and decreed the suit against Dl and D2.Aggrieved by the same Dl and D2 filed the present appeal.2. The facts in brief are as follows :Defendants 1 and 2 borrowed an amount of Rs.3,900/- from the third defendant and executed a pronote on 2-11-1968 at Nuzvid and executed the suit ...
C.M. Balaraman Vs. Registrar, Osmania University and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: AIR1998AP105; 1997(5)ALT437
J. Chelameswar, J.1. The Bar Council of India addressed a letter dated 11-11-1996 to the Private Secretary to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, along with an enclosure another letter dated 8-11-1996 addressed to the Registrar, Osmania University, Hyderabad, for placing the same before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice. The content of the enclosure is that, it refers to some earlier correspondence between the Bar Council of India and Osmania University about the poor state of affairs and standards maintained by most of the law colleges affiliated to the Osmania University. It was further observed by the Bar Council of India in its letter as follows :The Colleges have not been keen to improve the basic requirements like proper and sufficient accommodation, reasonably good library, sufficient number of qualified fulltime teachers, enforcement of attendance by students and required number of hours of teaching. Whenever the Bar Council of India visited the ...
Prodduturi Sujatha Vs. Prodduturi Mohona Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: AIR1998AP1; 1997(6)ALT67; I(1998)DMC734
P. Ramakrishnam Raju, J. 1. This is a reference made under Section 17 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 -- hereinafter called 'the Act', by the District Judge, Vijayawada in D.O.P. No. 496 of 1994 filed under Section 10 of the Act. Petitioner is the wife of the respondent, who are Christians. Their marriage took place on 19-1-1988 at Kankipadu as per Christian usage and custom. Two children were born during the wedlock. Respondent got addicted to vices, started harassing the petitioner, and finally, deserted her. He is living in adultery. Therefore, petitioner filed the O.P. seeking dissolution of marriage.2. Respondent remained ex parte.3. Petitioner examined herself as P.W. 1 and marked Exs. A-1 to A-3. Ex. A-1 is the Marriage Certificate; while Exs.A-2 and A-3 are the notices exchanged between the petitioner and respondent. Learned District Judge allowed the petition in a cryptic order without assigning reasons, which is as follows:'The evidence of P.W. 1 is in support of the petition...
Leburu Sudhakara Reddy Vs. Gandavaram Rama Subbamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: 1997(6)ALT15
ORDERB.S. Raikote, J.1. Though the matter is posted on 01-07-1997 for admission, the learned Counsel on both sides submitted that the matter itself could be finally disposed of at the stage of admission itself. The case is posted for admission today.2. This petition is filed by the third party in an execution petition in E.P. No. 5 of 1989 arising in O.S.No. 27 of 1987. The petitioner himself is the decree holder in O.S.No. 138 of 1985. It is a decree for money. He filed E.P. No. 1/89 for the execution of the said decree before the Court. In that the present petitioner filed E.A.No. 83 of 1993 to set aside the sale dated 20-4-1993. That application has been dismissed by the impugned order. Hence he has approached this Court by way of this Revision Petition (sic, A.A.O.).3. Heard the learned Counsel on both sides. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned sale in favour of the present R1 dated 20-04-1993 is illegal and the same is liable to be set aside. It is s...
Siddireddy Satyanarayana and ors. Vs. Kadim Papa Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-1997
Reported in: 1997(6)ALT283
Krishna Saran Shrivastav, J.1. The defendants are the appellants. Suit for recovery of the suit property has been decreed against them by the first appellate Court, reversing the judgment and decree of dismissal of the suit by the Subordinate Judge, Rajahmundry.2. The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal, in brief, are that, the first appellant on behalf of himself and his minor sons, that is the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 had executed a sale deed, Ex.A-1, for a consideration of Rs. 12,000/- on 28-6-1974, in favour of the deceased plaintiff Kadim Venkataswamy, after receiving an advance of Rs. 3,500/- and the balance amount of consideration of Rs. 8,500/- was agreed to be paid before the Sub-Registrar at the time of registration of sale deed, Ex.A-1. Although it was mentioned in the sale deed, Ex.A-1, that the vendor had put the deceased-plaintiff Kadim Venkataswamy in possession of the suit property, yet, it was not delivered to him, because it was agreed between them that its po...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »