Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(1)ALD493; 1999(1)ALT413
ORDERN.Y. Hanumanthappa, J 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 27-10-1994 passed in IA No.476 of 1994 in OP No.85 of 1988 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Nalgonda, reviewing the Order and Decree dated 20-12-1993 passed in the said OP.2. The scope of Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act is to determine the just and adequate compensation. Whether it is the Land Acquisition Officer or the Court,they shall keep in mind the principles in the said Section. While determining the compensation, both the claimants and the State shall be placed on the same pedestal and compensation be determined guided by the relevant factors existing on the date of acquisition supported by evidence, if not by capitalisation method or guess work. Its final result shall appear reasonable. Whenever there is an attempt to circumvent the order determining the compensation or an attempt to misrepresent the Court, such an attempt shall be discouraged.3. In the case on hand, the procedure followed by ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALD829; 1998(6)ALT819; II(1999)DMC570
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for both sides.2. The petitioner-wife has filed this application for transfer ofOP.No.231 of 1996 which is filed for divorce, pending on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Kothapet, Ranga Reddy District to the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Narsaraopet, Guntur District on the ground that she has also filed an application for maintenance before the Additional Munsif Magistrate, Narsaraopet vide MC No.32 of 1996 as also OP No.142 of 1997 under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act before the Subordinate Judge, Narsaraopet on the ground that she is a poor lady and the distance between Narsaraopet and Hyderabad is about 350 KMs. and it is not possible for her to contest the case at Hyderabad.3. This application is opposed mainly on the ground that the respondent-husband had filed a petition for divorce in OP No.231 of 1996 in the Court of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, at Kothapet, Ranga Reddy District earlier than the petition fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1999]98CompCas93(AP); (1999)1CompLJ282(AP)
P. Venkataramareddi, J. 1. This is an appeal against the order of the learned single judge in C. A. No. 279 of 1992 in C. P. No. 3 of 1986. 2. The official liquidator, who is the first respondent in the application, has filed this appeal, The company by name M/s. Guardian Papers Limited was wound up by an order of this court dated November 7, 1989, on a petition filed by a creditor. It appears that the financing institutions, viz., Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI) (the first respondent) and other institutions filed suits in the High Court at Mumbai. This court allowed those suits to continue, by an order dated March 22, 1991. While so, the first respondent-bank filed an application, C. A. No. 279 of 1992, seeking the following directions : (1) To direct the official liquidator to sell the movable and immovable assets of the company in liquidation to the seventh respondent, viz., Chaitanya Papers Limited, on the terms and conditions contained in the letter of the applicant-ba...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(1)ALD505
1. Here is a man whofought the litigation as party-in-person for over two decades, knocking the doors of justice from the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal to the Supreme Court, to vindicate his right to get appointment as Junior Medical Officer (Homoeo) as per the selections made by the 2nd respondent pursuant to the notification dated 2-1-1979 and 12-1-1979 to fill up 17 vacancies in the 2nd respondent organisation. Ultimately the petitioner succeeded in getting appointment on 10-2-1992 after the Supreme Court dismissed SLP No. 17522 of 1991 on 9-12-1991 which was filed against the orders of this Court in review WA MP No.245 of 1991 in WA No.1020 of 1990 dated 12-7-199!. Though the petitioner sought several reliefs, particularly in WPNo.18764 of 1988, including the implementation of Rule 22 of Andhra Pradesh Subordinate Service Rules hereinafter referred to as 'General Rules' providing rule of reservation to the constitutionally permissible classes and consequently to appoint hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(1)ALD26; 1999(1)ALT94
ORDER1. The learned Counsel for the petitioners filed a memo seeking leave to withdraw his vakalat. With the leave of the Court, the second petitioner has argued the matter personally.2. In this writ petition the petitioners assail the action of the first respondent, the Nizams Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, ('NIMS' for short) in treating both the scats in M.D. (R.D.)/D.M. R.D. available to Osmania University area as reserved seats and giving admission to respondents 3 and 4 herein as being arbitrary and illegal and consequently to direct the first and second respondent-authorities to give admission to one of the petitioners herein into the said course/courses by treating one of the said seats as an open seat. It is not in dispute that the total number of seats available in M.D.(R.D.) course are two and the seats available in D.M. R.D. course are four in NIMS which is a State-wide institution. Thus the total number of seats for both the courses which are treated as a single ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(4)ALD55; 1999(1)ALT70
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed questioning the show-cause notice dated 28-2-1998 issued by the first respondent in purported exercise of suo motu powers of revision proposing to cancel the order dated 27-5-1962 passed by the Additional Assistant Settlement Officer, Nellore granting ryotwari patta under Section 11 of the Estates Abolition Act in favour of the petitioner's grandfather in respect of an extent of 0.48 cents of land in RS No.277/10 of Venkatagiri Village, Nellore District on the ground that the said order is irregular.2. On an earlier occasion when the revenue authorities refused to implement the said order dated 27-5-1962, the petitioner herein filed WP No.10773 of 1996 for a direction to implement the said order. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court on merits by an order dated16-8-1996 upholding the validity of the order dated 27-5-1962 and the District Collector was directed to implement the same. Pursuant to the said directions of this Court on inst...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(1)ALD298; 1999(1)ALT556
1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment of Addl. Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy dated 29th July 1998 rendered in SC No. 19 of 1996 convicting the appellant-accused for an offence under Section 376 IPC and under Section 3(1)(xii) read with 3(2)(v) of SC and ST (PA) Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.2. The facts relating to this appeal may be stated briefly: The accused has been working as a Forest Guard at Gummaddala village in Chennaram Mandal, MedakDistrict. The complainant P. Narayana PW1 and his wife Pochamma and their daughter (victim) PW3 are the residents of that village. They belong to Scheduled Caste. PW3 was working as maid-servant in the house of the accused for eight months prior to the incident. Four months prior to the incident, the wife of the accused went to her parents house for delivery. According to PW3 she us...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(1)ALD251; 1999(1)ALT36
ORDER1. I disposed of the Writ Petition No.12532 of 1997 on the basis of concession made by both the sides to the Writ Petition. The order read as follows:'The learned Counsel appearing for both the sides submitted that the facts of this case are substantially similar to those in Writ Petition No. 17138 of 1997 disposed of by a single Judge of this Court on 14-10-1997. It is also submitted by the learned Counsel for the parties that the validity of the above order of D.H. Nasir, J. was called in question in Writ Appeal No.1362 of 1997 and the Division Bench dismissed the same by itsorder dated 1-12-1997. In that view of the matter, I dispose of the Writ Petition in terms of the direction issued by D.H. Nasir, ). in his order dated 14-10-1997 in WP No.17138 of 1997. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.'2. Against this consent order, Writ Appeal No.1308 of 1998 was filed. The Division Bench allowed the Writ Appeal and set aside the order of the single B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(1)ALD12; 1998(6)ALT448
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J. 1. In this writ petition, petitioner seeks an order declaring that clause 4 of the A.P. Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions) Order, 1974 insofar as it does not exclude the period of study by a candidate in a non-state wide educational institution for the purpose of reckoning consecutive years of study, as unconstitutional and contrary to Articles 14 and 371-D of the Constitution of India, and further seeks a declaration that the petitioner continues to be the local candidate of the Osmania University area and also a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for admission into post-graduate medical course treating the petitioner as a local candidate of the Osmania University area.2. Before we proceed to examine the implications involved in the writ petition, few facts which are necessary, are narrated as under:According to the petitioner, her primary, high school and intermediate education was in the district of Karimnaga...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(1)ALD206; 1999(1)ALT132
ORDER1. This Civil Revision Petition arises out of an application filed by the petitioner under Section 45(3) read with Section 78(1) of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act 30 of 1987 before the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments for deletion of the subject lands from the list of properties registered as endowed to Sri Ramalingeswara Swamy Temple in the Endowments Register of 1981 and to direct the second respondent i.e., the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments to withdraw the complaint lodged by him against the petitioner.2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the protected tenant in respect of the subject lands and that they are not endowed properties belonging to the said temple and that the same were erroneously recorded in the Endowments Register as endowed properties of the temple. The petitioner sought to place reliance on certain observations and findings recorded by the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Ranga Reddy District in ...
Tag this Judgment!