Andhra Pradesh Court December 1998 Judgments

Sri Venkateshwara Minerals, Bollaram, Medak Dist. Vs. A.P.S.E.B., Hyde ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(3)ALD699; 1999(2)ALT352

ORDER1. The petitioner prays for issuance of an appropriate writ or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the revised bills under H.T. Category for the months of July, August and September, 1998 as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against the principles of natural justice.2. The petitioner under an agreement with the respondent-APSEB obtained LT power supply with a load of 125 HP. It is stated that at no point of time, the petitioner has exceeded the load of 125 HP. The petitioner was served with a bill dated 1-8-1998 for the month of July, 1998 for asum of Rs.6,908.00 and for the month of August, 1998, for a sum of Rs.6,103.00 and the petitioner is stated to have paid the entire amount as demanded. However, the fourth respondent herein served upon the petitioner another revised bill in respect of the consumption for the months of July and August, 1998 for a sum of Rs. 18,840.00 and Rs.19,590.00 respectivel...

Bandi Nagaraju Vs. Mandal Revenue Officer Garladinne Mandal, Anantapur ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD621; 1999(1)ALT535

1. The petitioner stales that he was a landless poor person and was eligible for assignment of land. In the year 1979 he submitted an application to the then Tahsildar for assignment of a suitable land. He further states that after conducting a detailed enquiry in the village and after following the procedure prescribed by law, through proceedings DAR Dis.No.202/89(K), dated 6-11-1979, land to an extent of 1.39 Acres in Survey No.276-2 was assigned to him. He took the possession and is enjoying the possession of the land. He submits that, there is a private tank situated adjacent to his land in Survey No.275 which has been recognised by the Collector as such by proceedings dated 8-10-1937. The5th respondent has some wet land in Survey No.386. In order to get his land irrigated the 5th respondent encroached upon the land to an extent of 50 cents belonging to the petitioner and only 89 cents were left for cultivation to the petitioner. Therefore the petitioner brought the matter to the n...

Dokala Buchiraju Vs. Dokala Bangaramma (Died) by Lr

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD676; 1999(1)ALT527

ORDER1. This revision petition is filed by the original defendant challenging the judgment and order dated 21-8-1998 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur on IA No.935 of 1997 in OS No.45 of 1997.2. By the impugned order, Beela Parvati has been brought on record as the legal representative of the deceased sole respondent Dokala Bangaramma on the basis of the registered Will dated 8-1-1997, marked in the case as Ex.A1.3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the Will is not proved according to law and there are suspicious circumstances and the Will is a fabricated document at the instance of PW1, Beela Maheswara Rao, the husband of Parvati. He further submitted that on the basis of the Will, a person cannot be permitted to continue the suit in view of the judgment of this Court reported in A. Apparao v. K. Ammoru, : 1998(2)ALD296 . He submitted that at any rate, the deceased was not of sound disposing state of mind and as such the Will is not genuine. The la...

Kodapalli Satyanarayana Vs. Kondapalli Mavullu and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(2)ALD175; 1999(2)ALT79

ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. Thesubstantial question of law at issue in this Second Appeal is regarding the scope of Section 40 of the Transfer of Property Act read with Section 91 of the Indian Trusts Act.2. Since this is a second appeal findings of fact cannot be disturbed and that too in a case like this where the findings of fact are concurrent. In fact, there is also no scope to challenge the findings of fact of the Courts below and rightly Mr. V.LN.G.K. Murthy, the learned Counsel for the appellant, did not assail the findings of fact. On the basis of the findings of fact, he has raised the legal contentions centering round the provisions contained in the Transfer of Property Act as also Indian Trusts Act mentioned above.3. The brief facts leading to hearing of the second appeal are thus stated:The parties are referred to as arrayed in the Original Suit. Defendant No.4 is the appellant herein, while the plaintiff is the 3rd respondent, his mother and step mother are respondents ...

Divisional Railway Manager, Vijayawada Division and Others Vs. B.V. Ra ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. FA. IA. No. 952/1998 is for condoning the delay of 69 days (not 79 days as stated in the petition) in preferring FA. SR. No. 2628/1998 by the opposite parties in O.P. No. 91 /1997 on the file of Hyderabad District Forum-I questioning its order dated 16.5.1998 partly allowing that O.P. and directing the petitioners/appellants to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards damages and Rs. 1,000/- towards costs together with interest at 12% per annum on the damages from the date of the order. The order of the District Forum was admittedly despatched on 29.5.1998 by the District Forum and was received by the Railway Advocate at Eluru on 8.6.1998 and it was received by the petitioners/appellants on 10.6.1998. The appeal was presented on 16.9.1998. The only reason given for the delay is as follows : On receipt of the certified true copy of the order passed by the District Forum in O.P. No. 91 /97, the same was examined and put up to the 1st appellant (1st petitioner herein) who i...

Circulation Manager, Sphoorti Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mrs. P. Vanaja R ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Dr. (Mrs.) Mamata Lakshmanna, Member: 1. This appeal is preferred by the opposite party in O.P. No. 1361/97, District Forum, Hyderabad-I aggrieved by its order dated 30.4.1998. The case in brief is as follows. As per agreement for appointment as agent of Vartha paper in Sangareddy the complainant deposited Rs. 30,000/-out of Rs. 70,000/- on 31.1.1997 with the opposite party. The balance amount was to be paid by 8.8.1997. Since she had no experience of paper distribution work, she was assured by /the Sales Executive to train her for some time and help her in paper distribution by supervising if necessary. From 1.8.1997 she was appointed as an agent of Vartha under the supervision of the Sales Executive. She started getting threatening calls from the very first day demanding that she should give up the agency. She, however, continued as an agent till 6.8.1997 i.e. for 6 days. On 7.8.1997 her husband Mr. P. Venkateswara Rao was kidnapped by some unknown people, which was widely publicised...

Dr. B.R. Bapuji Vs. Registrar, University of Hyd. and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD469; 1999(1)ALT280

1. Respondent No.1 issued an employment notification on 31st May, 1989 calling for applications for various posts including the post of Reader in the Applied Linguistics. Number of candidates filed their applications. The petitioner as well as respondent No.9 applied for the post. The petitioner was not selected whereas respondent No.9 was selected and he was eventually appointed as Reader by an order dated 4th December, 1989. This writpetition has been filed immediately thereafter and is pending since then. The selection and appointment of respondent No.9 has been challenged through the medium of this writ petition. Mainly the selection and appointment of respondent No.9 has been challenged on the ground that respondent No.9 was not eligible to be appointed as Reader in Applied Linguistics in the Centre for Applied Linguistics and Translation Studies. It is further stated that the petitioner was eligible and a direction is sought from this Court that the selection and appointment of r...

B. Lakshmaiah Vs. Veeramalli Nagesh and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD611; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)297; 1999(1)ALT438; 1999CriLJ1107

1. The complainant in CC No. 239 of 1994 on the file of theX Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, is the appellant herein. The 1st respondent herein (referred as respondent hereinafter) is the accused in the said case.2. The facts in brief resulting in filing of this appeal are as under:The appellant-complainant filed a private complaint for the offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. On 13-5-1996, the accused was present and the complainant was absent. He was absent till 4 p.m. on that day and there was no representation on behalf of the complainant. His Counsel was also absent. Under those circumstances, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 256 Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by that Order, the complainant preferred the revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. to the Court of Metropolitan Session Judge, Hyderabad andthe same was taken on the file as Criminal Revision Petition No.77 of 1996. The learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge by his order dated 20...

Pentakota Koteswara Rao Vs. State of A.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD693; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)616

1. This appeal has been preferred by the sole accused in SC & STSessions Case No.13 of 1996 on the file of the Special Judge (Metropolitan Sessions Judge), Visakhapatnam, against his conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(i) and 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atirocities ) Act, 1989 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') and for the offence punishable under Section 323 IPC and the sentences of imprisonment imposed against him. He was sentenced to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and also Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years and also Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of six months for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(xi) and 3(1)(x) of the Act respectively. He was also sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 323 IPC and all the sentence are ordered to run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as fo...

Indian Ovver Seas Bank, Lakadikapool Branch Vs. G. Ramulu and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(2)ALD104; 1999(2)ALT40

ORDER1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiff in the suit. The lower Court while decreeing the suit for the full amount of Rs.1,23, 107.46 as against the 1st defendant who is the principal borrower, however, granted decree for the principal amount of Rs.92,160/- only as against defendants 2 and 3 who are the guarantors. According to the appellant, defendants 2 and 3 also are liable for the interest and costs etc., along with the first defendant as their liability is co-extensive with that ofthe 1st defendant. I find force in this submission. Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act provides that the liability of the surety is co-existensive with that of the principal debtor unless it is otherwise provided by the contract. Ex.A3 is the guarantee bond executed by defendants 2 and3 in favour of the plaintiff. It specifically provides that the guarantors will be jointly and severally liable not only for the principal amount of Rs.92,160/- which was advanced by the plaintiff to the ! st defen...