Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.
M.Mohan Rao and Ohters Vs. Revenue Divisional Officer and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD193; 1998(5)ALT323
ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J. 1. Inwrit petition No. 11641 of 1997, the petitioners who were members of Mandal Parishad, Manoor Mandal, Medak District, have challenged the declaration issued by the first respondent in Form No. VII declaring that the petitioners ceased to be the members of Mandal Parishad in view of the disqualification under Rule 8 of the Rules framed under Section 245 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act. The said declaration was made pursuant to the proviso introduced to Rule 8 by G.O. Ms.No. 171, Panchayat Raj Department, dated 19-4-1997. The proviso to Rule 8 of the Rules for moving the motion of non-confidence against President or Vice-President of Mandal Parishad etc., introduced by G.O.Ms.No. 171 reads as follows:'Provided that an elected member of a recognised political party shall cease to be a member if he votes in disobedience to the directions issued by the party whip.'2. Clause (iii) of the Explanation to the said Rule is also relevant. It says:'The said Officer shal...
Sri Satyanarayana Talkies, Rep. by Its Managing Partner, Kodera Sanjee ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALT758
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Municipality.2. Writ of Certiorari is sought pertaining to the record relating to demand notice No. 1307 dated 18-7-1994 issued by the Narasaraopet Municipality and seeks to quash the same declaring it as void in the set of circumstances stated by the petitioner.3. The petitioner, who is a resident of Narasaraopet Town, owns a theatre situate in Narasaraopet town. Property tax was levied @ Rs. 956/-per year upto the assessment year 1981-82. According to the petitioner, the Narasaraopet Municipality effected a general revision of property tax on the assessee from 1-10-1981 and revised the property tax payable by the petitioner and fixed at Rs. 3374-80 per half year.4. While so, an association, in the name and style of 'the Narasaraopet Rate Payers Association', filed a suit in O. S. No. 30 of 1982 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Narasaraopet allegi...
Nallabilli Satyanarayana Vs. Kinthali Krishna Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD659; 1999(2)ALT612
ORDER1. This revision petition is filed against the Judgment in RCA No.9 of 1991 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Parvathi-puram (Rent Control Appellate Authority), dated 19-7-1993 setting aside the eviction order in RCC No.1 of 1986 on the file of the Rent Controller-Principal District Munsif, Parvathipuram, dated 7-10-1991. 2. The revision petitioner is the landlord of the demised premises, which is a non-residential building and he filed RCC No.1 of 1986 before the Rent Controller under Section 10(3)(a)(iii) of the A.P. (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, for short the 'Act', on the ground of bona fide personal requirement. The Rent Controller after examining the landlord on one side and the tenant as well as three other witnesses no the other side and after scrutinising Exs.A1 to A4 and B1 to B10, found that the landlord has established his bona fide requirement of starting a business in pharmaceuticals and accordingly allowed the eviction petition. The tenant preferred an...
G. Laxminarasamma (Smt.) Vs. Director, A.P. Engg. Research Labs Himaya ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1998
Reported in: II(1998)ACC601; 2000ACJ85; 1998(4)ALD699; 1998(4)ALT541
ORDER1. The petitioner's husband, viz., Late Sri G.Sanjeeva Rao, was serving in the establishment of the 1st respondent as Lab Attendant, he the course of employment he met with an accident on 4-10-1994 and, ultimately, he died on 24-10-1994. In pursuance of the Group Janata Personal Accident Policy introduced in the establishment of the 1st respondent, necessary premium was recovered from the salary of the deceased employee on 9-10-1994 and the said premium was sent to the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company by way of demanddraft on 10-10-1994. The receipt of the demand draft on 10-10-1994 itself by the 2nd respondent is an undisputed fact. After the death of the employee, the petitioner-widow submitted a claim application for payment of assured sum of money. The petitioner's request was turned down by the Divisional Manager by letter dated 26-7-1996, which reads as follows:'ToThe Director, A.P.Engg.Research Labs,Himayatsagar,Hyderabad-500030.Dear Sir,Ref: Accident to Mr. G. Sanjeeva Rao...
Dommeti Lakshmi Vasundhara (Died) and Others Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD243; 1998(5)ALT675
ORDER1. All the three Revisions can be disposed of by a common order as identicalquestions of law arise in all these revisions.2. All the Revisions are filed aggrieved by the orders of the learned Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, East Godavari in LRA Nos.249/90, 11/1991 and 16/1992 dated 23-6-1994. Since the original Declarant died their LRs are prosecuting the cases and it is necessary to trace certain facts in nutshell.3. One D. Gopala Krishna filed declaration LCC No.797/APM/75 under Section 8(1) of the Land Reforms Act on behalf of his family unit. After enquiry, the Tribunal by orders dated 27-12-1977 declared that the family unit of the declarant was holding an excess of the ceiling area., Aggrieved by the said order, he preferred LRA No.756/1978which was allowed on 13-2-1980 and the matter was remanded for fresh disposal on the point of tenancy. The appellate authority also ordered exclusion of certain lands from the computation of the declarant. To the extent of this direction,...
Jagadamba Pearls Dealer Vs. Airport Authority of India, National Airpo ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD233
ORDER1. The petitioner was initially granted licence for running pearls stall in Hyderabad Airport from 15-8-1990 to 14-8-1993 and thereafterwards ad hoc extension from 15-8-1993 to 31-3-1997 was granted. When the term of the licence came to an end by 31-3-1997, the authority called for tenders for disposing of the stall. In response to the tender notification, the petitioner submitted its offer in the tender schedule obtained by one M/s. Krishna Pearls. At this juncture itself I may point out that the tender schedule was obtained by M/s. Krishna Pearls, but along with the tender schedule, the petitioner produced a letter given by M/s. Krishna Pearls stating that the tender schedule was obtained by them on behalf of the petitioner and they have no objection to treat the tender submitted by the petitioner as that of the petitioner. Along with the petitioner, three more persons submitted their tenders, including the 3rd respondent herein. Tenders were opened and finalised on 3-10-1997. I...
Naval Kishore Somani Vs. Poonam Somani
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD349; 1998(5)ALT234; I(1999)DMC415
ORDERA.S. Bhate, J. 1. The appeal before us raises one important point amongst others. The important point that arises before us is:'Whether a petitioner in a petition seeking divorce on the ground of 'cruelty', is entitled to claim such a decree under any circumstances, merely on the ground that the respondent has failed to prove the charges of 'cruelty' levelled in the counter by way of defence, against the petitioner?'2. This point, along with others on facts, arises in the present appeal in the following circumstances:The appellant is the original petitioner in OP No.9 of 1996. It is not disputed that marriage between petitioner and respondent took place under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and was performed on 26-1-1989 at Visakhapatnam. The spouses are not residing together since April, 1990. It is petitioner's case that immediately after marriage, both of them went for honeymoon. The petitioner is resident of Secunderabad. ...
Radha Bai and ors. Vs. Yasoda Bai and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1998
Reported in: 1998(6)ALT555
B. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. These three appeals arise out of the judgment and decree dated 12th June, 1995 passed in O.S.No. 1071 of 1985 by the Court of the IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Of course, it is a common judgment in the said suit and also in suit O.S.No. 548 of 1990. In O.S.No. 1071 of 1985, one P. Kishanlal is the plaintiff and as he died, his legal representatives were added as plaintiffs 2 to 8. That is a suit instituted against M/s. Smt. Yasoda Bai, V. Narasimha Chary and Angoori Bai claiming specific performance in respect of suit schedule building comprising of two floors and bearing municipal Nos. 21-2-146 and 21-2-156 situated at Gulzar House, Charkaman, Hyderabad. In O.S.No. 548 of 1990, same P. Kishanlal is the plaintiff and on account of his death, his legal representatives were added as plaintiffs 2 to 8 and the defendants are M/s. Angoori Bai, Chaturbhuj and V. Narasimha Chary. In the said suit, the relief is for the grant of perpetual injunction...
K. Jagadish and Others Vs. Singareni Colleries Company Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-28-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)ALD730
ORDER1. The petitioners have sought for a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not paying equal pay for equal work to the petitioners on par with the General Mazdoor Category -I employees from the date of their initial appointment as illegal, unjust, contrary to law, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and for a consequential direction to the respondent to pay equal pay for equal work on par with the General Mazdoor Category -1 employees from the date of their initial appointment.2. This relief sought by the petitioners is essentially grounded on the judgment of this Court in Thalia Venkati and others v. the Singareni Colleries Limited, Ramagundam, in Writ Petition No.2170 of 1987 and batch. This Court while disposing of those writ petitions vide its order dated 2-2-1990 directed the respondent-Management to pay the petitioners therein the wages at the rate of the minimum scale of pay admissible to Gene...
Majlis-c-shura Dasti Parcha Bafi HermaIn SharifaIn Wakf Committee Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-28-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD236; 1998(5)ALT761
ORDERUmesh Chandra Banerjee, C.J.1. These writ appeals are directed against the order of the learned single Judge wherein the Rule nisi issued has been made absolute in part. The learned single Judge, while dealing with the matter did set aside the direction contained in the impugned resolution of the Wakf Board authorising the Chief Executive Officer to proceed for taking over the properties into the direct management along with institutions. The learned Judge further directed that the inquiry initiated by the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board under Section 71 of the Wakf Act, 1995 shall continue and in the event the allegations made against Sri KM. Arifuddin stand proved, it would be open to the Wakf Board to order for taking over the properties into the direct management of the Board along with the institutions. It is this order which is under challenge in the appeals.2. On the factual score it appears that the inquiry was being conducted in terms of the directive of the State Government an...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »