Andhra Pradesh Court October 1999 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.
B. Adinarayana Murthy Vs. Collector Ananthapur Dist. and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD168; 1999(6)ALT322
ORDER1. In this writ petition, a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order is sought declaring the action of the respondents in resuming the land to an extent of Ac. 5.20 cents situated in Survey No.223/1 in Munimadugu village, Penukonda Mandal, Ananthapur District without paying compensation as illegal and a consequential direction to the respondents to pay the compensation to the petitioner for the resumption of the said land as per G.O. Ms. No.1307, dated 23-12-1993 is also sought by the petitioner.2. One B. Govindappa was assigned the Government lands to an extent of Ac. 5.20 cents in Sy.No. 223-1 of Munimadugu village, Penukonda Manal of Anantapur District way back in the year 1960. Since then, till the death of said B. Govindappa, he was cultivating the said land. B. Govindappa died in the year 1985 leaving behind tlie present petitioner B. Adinarayana Murthy as his sole legal heir. The petitioner being the legal heir of late B, Govindappa started cultivating the sa...
G. Satish Kumar Vs. Convenor, Ecet (Fdh-99), Jntuc College and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD413; 2000(2)ALT256
ORDER1. The petitioner is a Diploma Holder. He appeared for Engineering Common Entrance Test ECET (FDH) 99. The said common entrance test is conducted for admission to a short term Engineering course specially meant for Diploma Holders like the petitioner. The petitioner has secured the rank 183. He was also admitted in the Engineering College in Warangal District.He is challenging the action of the respondents viz., Andhra Pradesh State Council of Higher Education and the Convenor, ECET (FDH) 99, JNTU College, Kukatpalli, Hyderabad, in not entertaining the application of the petitioner for retotalling/personal verification as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has raised only ground on the touch-stone of equality clause in Article 14 of the Constitution. He has made a two fold submission. First, he submits that the JNTU is the nodal authority for conducting entrance test for Engineering Courses meant for Diploma holders as well...
Jyothi Automobiles, Hyderabad and Others Vs. Khet Bai and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD627
ORDER1. These two civil revision petitions, one filed by the tenants, and the other filed by the landlady for eviction of the tenants from the petition schedule premises under the provisions of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein will be referred as per their array in the eviction petition. The building in question is a non-residential building which has been let out by the petitioner to the respondents for the purpose of running an automobile spare parts shop. The rent payable is Rs.375/- per month. The tenancy is oral. The eviction petition was filed on 4-12-1984. Prior to the filing of the eviction petition, the petitioner-landlady filed a civil suit on 19-4-1982 being OS No.609 of 1983 on the file of the Court of the Additional Chief Judge (Temporary) Civil Court, Hyderabad against the tenant for arrears of rent, damages for use and occupation and ejectment after issue of notice terminating the tenancy. ...
Kosuru Kalinga Maharaju Vs. Kosuru Kaikamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)ALD789; 2000(2)ALT409
ORDER1. Order passed in IA No.476 of 1999 in O.S.No. 70 of 1995 dated 7-9-1999 by the Junior Civil Judge, Avanigadda is the subject-matter of challenge in this revision.2. Petitioner is the first defendant in the said suit OS No.70 of 1995 filed by respondents 1 to 4 herein for declaration of plaint schedule properties. Written statements have also been filed on behalf of the defendants. However, the first defendant who is the petitioner in this revision has filed IA No.476 of 1999 under Order 16 Rule 14 CPC requiring the Court below to summon the second plaintiff in the suit either as a Court witness or as a witness on his behalf (petitioner/first defendant's behalf) in order to elicit certain information with regard to the suit schedule properties.3. The Court below dismissed the said IA No.476 of 1999 by the impugnd order dated 7-9-1999 holding that summoning of a party to the suit proceedings as a witness by the other party on his behalf is unknown to law, against which this revisi...
B. Pratap Reddy Vs. Regional Transport Officer, Cuddapah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD147; 1999(6)ALT404
ORDERP. Venkatarama Reddi, J. 1. The petitioner who holds a contract carriage basic permit to ply within Cuddapah District and paying the tax of Rs.1,150/- per seat per quarter, made an application to the respondent informing him that the vehicle will have to ply outside the District now and then, and therefore, he may be permitted to pay the tax of Rs.380/- in terms of G.O. Ms. No.224, dated 7-11-1996.According to the said Government Order issued under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, Contract Carriages covered by basic permits and idle contract carriages plying on the strength of temporary or special permits issued under the Motor Vehicles Act, can obtain temporary or special permits for plying on Intra or Inter-State routes on payment of Rs.50/- per seat for a minimum period of 3 days and Rs.17/- per seat per day for a period exceeding 3 days. Under G.O. Ms. No.220, dated 7-11-1996 which is a notification issued under Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor...
Montari Industries Ltd., New Delhi Vs. Sri Tirumala Venkateswara Agenc ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD504
ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J1. This is the plaintiff's appeal against the judgment and decree in OS No.134 of 1988 dated 20-1-1993 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Bhimavaram. The plaintiff M/s. Montari Industries Limited, New Delhi, filed the said suit for recovery of Rs.5,06,565-76 ps. with interest at 18% p.a. from 1-10-1988 till realisation and for costs.2. It is not necessary to refer to the averments in the plaint and in the written statement in extenso for the purpose of disposing of this appeal. Suffice to say that the plaintiff is a company incorporated at New Delhi and is a manufacturer of pesticides and insecticides. The 1st defendant is a partnership firm with defendants 2 to 5 as its partners. The 1st defendant is a dealer in fertilisers and pesticides and purchases pesticides and insecticides from the plaintiff for the purpose of retail shop. The 1st defendant purchased the goods from the plaintiff and failed to pay the amount and became due to the tune of Rs.6,67,342.80 by 31st ...
Gannamani Anasuya and Others Vs. Parvatini Amarendra Chowdry and Other ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD533
ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J 1. This appeal isfiled against the judgment and decree in OS No.55 of 1985 dated 23-4-1993 passed by the Subordinate Judge at Ramachandrapuram. The defendants 2, 3 and 5 to 7 are the appellants.2. The plaintiffs filed the suit for the partition of plaint A schedule properties into 3 equal shares by metes and bounds and to allot 3 such shares to the plaintiffs and for partition of plaint B schedule property into 9 equal shares by metes and bounds and to allot 4 such shares to the plaintiffs through the process of Court and for directing defendants 1 to 3 to render fair and proper accounts in respect of the poultry business run in the plaintiffs B Schedule property from the year 1968 onwards till the date of filing of the suit and for future profits and costs.The averments in brief in the plaint are as follows:3. The plaintiffs are brothers and sons of the first defendant. Both of them are studying engineering and are students. The father of the ] st defendant Narasi...
Indian Bank, Sec'bad Vs. Boorugu Nagaiah Rajanna and others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)ALD548; 2000(2)ALT490
ORDERS.V. Maruthi, J 1. The appeal arises out of the suit in OS No.322 of 1983 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit was filed for recovery of Rs.3,00,067-40 Ps.2. The averments of the plaint in brief are as follows :The defendant No. 1 is a partnership firm and defendants 2 to 11 are the partners. The first defendant obtained Documentary Bills purchase facility for the business up to a limit of Rs.2,50,000/- in the year 1971 and executed promissory notes, a letter of continuity and an agreement for bills purchase facility as collaterial security for the repayment of amounts due to the plaintiff bank. The bills purchase facility was renewed from time to time. In the course of transactions between the plaintiff and the defendants, the branch office at Madras of the plaintiff bank returned six sets ofdocuments to the plaintiff bank reporting that they were dishonoured by the drawees (purchasers) when presented for...
Gollu Bhavani Sankar Vs. Bhogavalli Rajeswara Rao and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)ALD714; 1999(6)ALT374
ORDER1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dismissing an application filed by the petitioner herein under Section 10 CPC seeking stay of RCC No.11 of 1995 on the file of the Court of the Rent Controller-cum-Principal Junior Civit Judge, Tadepalligudem pending disposal of the suit OS No.45 of 1995 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem.2. The facts leading to this revision petition may be stated briefly:The petitioner herein is the 2nd plaintiff in OS No.45 of 1995 which is filed by the petitioner along with his mother for specific preformance of an agreement of sale dated 5-1-1995 alleged to have been executed by one K. Kasi Viswanatham, who figures as the first defendant in the said suit, in their favour agreeing to sell the plaint schedule property to them for a total sale consideration of three lakhs fifteen thousand. The said suit was filed on the allegations that on the date of the agreement, a sum of Rs. 65,000/- was paid by the plaintiffs b...
Vegi Jagadesh Kumar Vs. V. Radhika
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD76; 1999(6)ALT608; II(2000)DMC470
ORDERN.Y . Hanumanthappa, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order and decree passed by the learned Judge of Family Court, Visakhapatnam in OP No.84 of 1995 (Old OP No.288 of 1994), dated 22-5-1997, filed by the husband under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of Hindu Marriage Act against the wife Radhika for a decree of divorce and for custody of the child Kum. Vijeta.2. The rank of the parties is mentioned as before the Court below.3. A few facts which are necessary to dispose of this appeal are as follows: The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was performed on 25-8-1988 at Visakhapatnam. After the marriage, the respondent joined the petitioner at Visakhapatnam. The marriage proposal was made by one Pentakota Apparao, a friend of respondent's parents. At the time of marriage proposal, the petitioner and his parents were not willing for alliance as the respondent was a student in Medical College at Guntur and she may not be a good housewife. But the petitioner and his pare...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »