Andhra Pradesh Court October 1998 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.
T. Sakuntala Vs. B. Satya Murthy and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD2; 1998(6)ALT829
ORDER1. This revision petition is filed being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 17-9-1997 passed by the Additional Subordinate Judge, Eluru in E.A. No.217 of 1997 in E.P. No.82 of 1997 in OS No.74 of 1991. By the impugned order, the Court below rejected the petition filed by the decree-holder, on the ground that the pension of the respondents cannot be attached. The Court below relied upon a judgment of the High Court of Sindh reported in AIR (29) 1942 page 19 and also the judgment of the High Court of Madras reported in 1940 MWN page 1150. The learned Counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that under Section 60 of CPC, pension is not attachable, but the commuted pension can be attached. Whereas, on the side of the respondents, reliance is placed on the judgment of Supreme Court reported in Union of India v. Wing Commander, R.R. Hingorani, (1987) 2 SCJ 60, and also the judgment of the Madras High Court reported in C. Gopaiachariar v. Deepchand Sowear, AIR 1941 Mad.207...
Abdul Khuddus and ors. Vs. State of A.P. and anr. Overruled
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD246; 1998(5)ALT710
ORDERMOTILAL B. NAIK, J 1. Petitioners seek for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction calling for the records relating to LGC No. 15 of 1992 on the file of the Special Court under Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad, and quash the order dated 9-6-1994 passed thereon.2. Petitioners 1 to 3 herein are respondents 1, 3 and 4 respectively, in LGC No-15 of 1992 on the Special Court under AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad for short ('the Special Court'), The said LGC No.15 of 1992 was filed by the first respondent herein, viz., State of Andhra Pradcsh, represented by the Sub-Collector, Vijayawada, Krishna District, against the first petitioner herein Abdul Khuddus and one Smt. Jeenathunnissa Begum who died duringthe pendency of the said LGC and in her place sons were brought on record as respondents 3 and 4 respectively, who are petitioners 2 and 3 herein.3. Brief facts in the said LGC No. 15 of 1992 are hereunder:The fir...
Srinivasulu Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD310; 1998(6)ALT197
ORDER1. The parties have agreed for the final disposal of the writ petition itself. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner questions the rejection of his nomination for the post of Sarpanch of Thatikonda Gram Panchayat, Bhoothpur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. 3. It is urged before me by Mr. Malla Reddy, learned senior Counsel that the petitioner is presently working as inchargeSarpanch of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat on the resignation of the Sarpanch and the third respondent has issued an election notification for the post of the Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat on 1-6-1998 fixing the election schedule as under: (i) Filing of nominations -- From 2-6-98to 8-6-98. (ii) Scrutiny of nominations - 9-6-1998 (iii) Withdrawal of nominations - 12-6-98 (iv) Election - 29-6-98 He submits that the nomination of the petitioner for the post of Sarpanch has been improperly rejected by the third respondent on the ground that he is disqualified within the meaning of Section 19(3) of the Andhr...
Commissioner of Police, A.P. Hyd. Vs. SadruddIn H. Javeri and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD691; 1998(6)ALT779; [2000]243ITR602(AP)
ORDERV. Rajagopala Reddy, J 1. The above Review Petitions and Contempt Cases are filed seeking review of the common judgment of this Court in Writ Petitions Nos.4926 and 17700 of 1996, dated 17-10-1997 and complaining that the directions given in the judgment were not complied with. Hence, all the review petitions and contempt cases are taken up together for disposal by a common order.2. Rev. WPMP Nos.36129 and 36061 of 1997 are filed by the 3rd respondent in both the writ petitions-Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad.3. Rev. WPMP No.5942 of 1998 is filed by 4th respondent in WP No.4926 of 1997.4. Rev. WPMP No.34434 of 1997 is filed by 8th respondent in WP No.4926 of 1997 and respondents 4, 5 and 6 in WPNo.17700 of 1996.5. Contempt Cases Nos.1797 and 1798 of 1997 are filed by the writ petitioner in both the writ petitions.Rev.WPMP Nos.36129. 36061 & 34434 of 1997 & 5942 of 1998:Before we proceed to consider the review petitions, it is necessary to notice the facts of the case, in brief, ...
MashIn Ali Khan Alias Mujeeb Vs. State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)ALT133
ORDERB. Bikshapathy, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent-State Government to appoint a Judge not below the rank of District Judge to initiate a detailed enquiry into the allegations with regard to the news item published in Eenadu Telugu Daily on 28-3-1998 and submit a report and further declaring the unauthorised and illegal action of the respondents 2 to 6 in conducting frequent raids on the house of the petitioner and taking away the valuable articles from his house and a consequential direction to return the articles or refund the value of the articles together with compensation of Rs. 5.00 lakhs.2. As per the averment in the petition, it is stated that a news item was published on 28-3-1998 in Eenadu Telugu Daily stating that number of antisocial elements are moving in Jahanuma area and number of crimes are being committed. The Police is not taking any action against these anti-social elements and rowdy-sheeters. It is the case ...
M. Srinivas and Others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD200; 1998(6)ALT229
ORDER1. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are the students of final year MBBS course having studied in the Medical Colleges affiliated to the second respondent, N.T.R. University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada. All the petitioners appeared for the final year MBBS examination in the subjects of Medicine, Surgery, Gynaecology and Obstetrics. The petitioners in these writ petitions have sought for a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the second respondent in not extending thebenefit to those students who have cleare4 the practical examination but could not make.it to the aggregate as arbitrary,.illegal, unjust and violativc of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and for a consequential direction to the respondents to extend the benefit of awarding grace marks upto 10 and declare the results of those students who would pass on extension of such benefits of grace-marks.2. The undisputed facts be stated first. They are : All the petitioners entered t...
K. Devender Reddy Adv. Vs. Singareni Colleries Co., Ltd. and ors., Adv ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD295
ORDER1. Rule nisi. Sri K. Srinivasa Murthy took notice for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri T. Niranjan Reddy took notice for Respondent No.4 Writ petition was heard finally.2. The petitioners four in number were initially appointed in the respondent Company as EP Operator in D Grade and subsequently got promotion as C-Grade and B also as E Grade. It is averred in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that in the year 1993 the respondent Company conducted special interview for the existing posts of EP Operators and the petitioners were sent for training for a period of three months at NIC Tamilnadu and all the petitioners along with some other EP Operators underwent the training. From the affidavit averments, it appears that on behalf of the petitioners and the similarly circumstanced, the trade union to which the petitioners and the others belong has raised an industrial dispute demanding that the petitioners and the similarly circumstanced others should be paid A Grade wages ...
Abdul Rasheed and Others Vs. Abdul Hakeem
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD682; 1998(6)ALT399
1. These two appeals arise out of two suits which were disposed of by a common judgment by the lower Court. For the sake of convenience the parties will be referred to as per their array in OS No.69 of 1989.2. The subject matter of both the suits is a vacant site measuring 91 sq. yards. OS No.69 of 1989 is a suit for specific performance of the oral agreement of sale alleged to have been entered into by defendants 1, 2 and 4 to 6 with the plaintiff on 14-1-1989 agreeing to sell the suit site to the plaintiff and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The 7th defendant is the subsequent purchaser of the suit site along with the shed existing therein under two registered sale-deeds dated 1-2-1989 and 1-6-1989 marked as Exs.B1 and B2 respectively. Ex.B1 was executed by defendants 4 and 5 covering half share in the suit site whereas Ex.B2 executed by defendants 1 to 3, 6 and 8 to 10 covering ...
Kantamani Seeta Ramachandra Rao and Others Vs. Meesana Mohana Rao and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD177; 1999(1)ALT154
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 20-4-1989 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge at Kowur in AS No.53 of 1982 on his file confirming the judgment and decree dated 31-3-1982 passed in OS No.726 of 1978 on the file of the Principal District Munsif at Kowur, West Godavari district.2. The appellants herein are defendants 1, 2, 5 to 8 and the respondent No.l is the plaintiff and respondents 2 and 3 herein arc the defendants 3 and 4 in that suit OS No.726 of 1978. This appeal against R2 and R3 was dismissed for default by the order dated 23-4-1993. The parties are being referred as they are arrayed in the suit for the sake of convenience.3. The 1st respondent-plaintiff filed the said suit for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 11-1-1972 directing the defendants to execute a registered sale-deed in terms of the agreement and put the plaintiff in possession of the same and in default permit the plaintiff to take the sale-deed through Court. The pl...
Raj Kumar Vs. Ganesh Rai
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALD560; 1998(6)ALT304
ORDER1. CRP No. 1441 of 1998 arises out of RC No.594 of 1992 and CRP No. 1442 of 1998 arises out of RC No.726 of 1993 on the file of the Second Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad. In both the cases, the landlords sought eviction of the petitioner from the mulgi bearing No.4-3-646 at Rarnkote, Hyderabad in which the petitioner-tenant was carrying on hair-dressing saloon at the monthly rent of Rs.250/-. In RC No.594 of 1992, the ground for eviction is that the landlord (respondent herein) wants to demolish and reconstruct the entire building as it is in a dilapidated condition. The petition was, therefore, filed under Section 12 of the Act. In RC No.726 of 1993, which is between the same parties in respect of the same mulgi, the respondent herein filed eviction petition under Section 10(3)(iii)(b) and Section 10(2)(v) of the Act read with Section 12, The first ground is that the shop is required for the personal requirements. The second ground is that the respondent-tenant secured alt...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »