Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Kodali Nageswara Rao Vs. Koneru Venu and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD563
ORDER1. Complaining in-action on the part of the 2nd respondent herein in not taking any action for cancellation of the Passport of the 1st respondent bearing No.A-113801, dated 15-10-1990 issued by him under Section 10(3) of the Indian Passport Act, the defacto-complainant before XXII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to act in accordance with law at the earliest possible time.2. The facts leading to the filing of this case are that one Phani Priya daughter of the petitioner herein was given in marriage to one Koneru Venu, who is presently staying in United States of America by virtue of the Passport issued by the 2nd respondent valid from 15-10-1992 to 14-10-2000. Unfortunately, the marital relationship seemed to have broken down and the petitioner herein filed a complaint before the XXII Metropolitan Magistrate to take action against the 2nd respondent hereinunder Section 498-A of IPC, alleging that hi...
Menta Mastan Rao and Another Vs. Govt. of A.P. and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD674; 1998(5)ALT488
ORDER1. The two petitioners purchased an extent of 5,705.88 square metres of land in RS No.341/2B in the year, 1974 by a registered sale deed dated 2-1-1974 after obtaining an exemption under Section 7(2) of the Andhra Pradesh vacant Lands in Urban Areas (Prohibition of Alienation) Act 12 of 1972 vide G.O.Ms. No.1049 dated 24-7-1973. It appears, thereafter both the petitioners constituted a partnership firm by the name and style of M/s. Devi Dall & Flour Mill, Vijayawada, constructed a mill alongwith other two structures and according to the petitioners, the said constructions were made prior to the appointed day fixed under the Urban Land Ceilings (Regulation) Act, 1976. The appointed day being 28-1-1976. The petitioners averred in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the plans for the said buildings was sanctioned on 10-2-1974 and they were assessed to tax from the year 1974-75. Apart from the said land, both the petitioners owned other extents of lands in Vijayaw...
Juthge Chandra Prasad Vs. State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: II(1999)DMC554
N.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.1. Earlier, on 12.3.1998, this matter was heard by the Bench consisting one of us N.Y. Hanumanthappa, J. and Her Lordship Justice T. Meena Kumari. Before signing the said judgment, Her Lordship Justice T. Meena Kumari was transferred, as such, both the sides moved the case to hear afresh. That is how, it is listed for fresh hearing before us.2. This Criminal Revision Case is before us by way of reference by a learned Single Judge of this Court.3. At the request made by both the sides that this matter shall be heard by this Court as the same is pending since long time, the matter is heard. The facts leading to the present reference are as follows : 'The petitioner was charged for an offence under Section 498-A, Indian Penal Code. A case was instituted before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. On a transfer petition moved by the de facto complaint to transfer the case from the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bhimava...
Juthge Chandra Prasad Vs. the State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALT(Cri)25; 1999CriLJ32
N.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.1. Earlier, on 12-3-1998, this matter was heard by the Bench consisting one of us NYH, J. and Her Lordship Justice T. Meena Kumari. Before signing the said judgment, Her Lordship Justice T. Meena Kumari was transferred, as such, both the sides moved the case to hear afresh. That is how. it is listed for fresh hearing before us.2. This Criminal Revision Case is before us by way of reference by a learned single Judge of this Court.3. At the request made by both the sides that this matter shall be heard by this Court as the same is pending since long time, the matter is heard. The facts leading to the present reference are as follows :4. The petitioner was charged for an offence under Section 498-A, IPC. A case was instituted before the Judicial First Class Magistrate. Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. On a transfer petition moved by the de facto complainant to transfer the case from the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bhimavaram to some other Court si...
Rana Pratap Singh and ors. Vs. Land Acquisition Officer and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD299; 1998(5)ALT197
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. A writ petition had been filed in this Court being W.P.No. 29923/97 which was disposed of by this Court on 29th September, 1997 with the following order : 'An award has been passed and a reference had been made to the Civil Court. The reference has been dismissed on 20-9-1995. It appears from the record of the case, which had been called by this Court that the amount of compensation which had been awarded to the claimants had been deposited before the Principal Subordinate Judge, R.R. District at Saroornagar. Since the reference before him had already been dismissed, the amounts have remained undisbursed. In these circumstances, I allow the writ petition and direct the Principal Subordinate Judge, R.R. District at Saroornagar to disburse the amounts to the claimants in accordance with the award with accrued interest. The petitioners may approach the learned Principal Subordinate Judge with a copy of order of this Court who shall pass a...
Guthula Satyamma and ors. Vs. Rudraraju Venkataraju and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD410; 1998(5)ALT95
ORDER1. This revision is filed by the defendants 2, 3, 6 and 7 in O.S.No. 76 of 1989 on the file of the District Munisif, Alamuru, East Godavari District questioning the impugned order dated 21-3-1996 passed in I.A.No. 883 of 1995, entrusting the warrant of commission to another advocate for inspecting the suit locality and for filing his report.2. The first respondent herein is the plaintiff in the suit and he filed the suit originally in the vacation Court (District Court) at Rajahmundry. He also filed a petition for appointment of Commissioner to inspect the suit locality and file his report. The vacationCourt appointed an advocate of Rajahmundry as Commissioner. The Commissioner visited the suit locality and prepared his report and plait and filed it in the Court on 1-6-89, As some more features have to be observed and in view of the objections filed by the present petitioners the warrant was re-entrusted to hint for execution and the Commissioner accordingly visited the suit local...
R. FakruddIn and Others Vs. A.P.S.E.B., Hyderabad and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD375; 1998(5)ALT538
ORDER1. The petitioners in these five writ petitions arc the employees of the A.P. State Electricity Board. In these writ petitions, they have assailed the validity of the charge sheets issued to them. Since the facts pleaded in all these writ petitions are substantially similar and the questions which fall for consideration are common, the writ petitions were clubbed and heard together and they arc being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioner in WP No. 1897 of 1998 joined the service of the Board asWatchman on 27-6-1986; he was promoted as Helper on 27-10-1988 and he was further promoted as Assistant Lineman on 16-7-1992. The petitioner in WP No. 1929 of 1998 joined the service of the Board as Helper on 1-7-1972; he was promoted as Assistant Lineman on, 8-7-1982 and subsequently he was promoted as Lineman on 8-7-1992. The petitioner in WP No. 1964 of 1998 joined the service of the Board as Helper w.e.f. 31-7-1989 and presently he is serving as Junior Lineman. The petiti...
K. Sasikala Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Bellampalli, Adil ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1998
Reported in: 2000ACJ1120; 1998(5)ALD463; [1999]98CompCas293(AP)
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed for writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the LIC Policy amount in favour of the petitioner who was a nominee to the Policy Nos.680110588 and 680455246, as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and for a consequential direction to the respondents to release the policy amount in favour of the petitioner.2. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the nominee under the above insurance policies and that she is entitled for an amount of Rs.50,000/- under the policies on the death of her husband-policy holder due to accident on 28-11-1997. As the policies are for double claim due to accidental death, the petitioner claims an amount of Rs.2.57 lakhs.3. Learned Counsel for the 1st respondent Corporation, however, submits that the policies were assigned in favour of the 2nd respondent-Bank, in discharge of the surety amount due to the Bank by the policy-holder. It is urged that as per sub-section (6) of Section 38 of...
Kolleri Constructions, Hyd. Vs. Nectar Laboratories, Ltd., Hyd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD306; 1998(5)ALT213
1. By this application filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'the new Act'), the petitioner/firm seeks appointment of an independent arbitrator for adjudicating the dispute that has arisen between it and the respondent/Company. 2. By an agreement dated 16-2-1995 concluded between the petitioner/firm and the respondent/Company, construction of factory building, formation of roads and othercivil engineering works of the respondent/ Company was entrusted to the petitioner/firm. The estimated value of the contract was approximately Rs.48 lakhs. The work has not been completed within the stipulated period. Clause 56 of the agreement provides for adjudication of disputes through arbitration, 3. The case of the petitioner/firm, in brief, is that it was submitting running bills to the respondent/Company and it was paid amounts in instalments. On 23-1-1996, the petitioner/firm has submitted the final bill amounting to Rs. 63,14,070/-. The respondent...
C.V. Nana Rao Vs. Secretary to Government, L.A. and J., Govt. of A.P. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(5)ALD300
ORDERB.S. Raikote, J 1. This Writ Petition is filed for quashing the G.O.Ms.No.97 Law (L.A. & J- Courts.C) Department dated 01-06-1998, issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, with a further prayer for reinstatement. 2. The case of the Petitioner is that he was recruited in the Andhra Pradesh State Judicial Service as District Munsif, being duly selected by the competent authority. On appointment, he joined to his duty on 1.6.1995 and as directed, he joined in Andhra Pradesh Judicial Academy for training and after training, he was posted as Munsif Magistrate at Tekkali in Srikakulam District and accordingly, he discharged his duties from 4-10-1995 to the end of 8-5-1997. Meanwhile, he was transferred to Markapur, where he worked upto 6-9-1997 and then proceeded on medical leave upto 19-12-1997. His further case is that he discharged his duties to the satisfaction of his superiors. He stated that he proceeded on leave on medical grounds from 7-9-1997, since he was suffering from Inf...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »