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.
Antyakula Eswara Rao Vs. Gudla Kumaraswamy and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)ALD740; 1999(6)ALT644
1. Both the CRP and the appeal suit can be disposed of by a common judgment.2. OS No. 23 of 1987 (Old No.OS No.7 of 1982) is filed under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act for direction to Defendants No. 1 to 5 (Arbitrators) to produce original Award dated 4-2-1982 into the Court and to make it a Rule of Law while OS No.25 of 1987 (Old No. OS No. 13 of 1982) was filed by defendant No.6 in OS No.23 of 1987 for partition of Plaint-A to E Schedule properties into 10 equal shares and for separate possession and for permanent injunction restraining defendant Nos.5 to 9 (Arbitrators) from passing an award in terms of Arbitration Agreement dated 6-10-1981. For purpose of clarity OS No.23 of 1987 is referred to herein as arbitration suit and OS No.25 of 1987 is referred to herein as a partition suit. While the CRP is filed against the judgment and decree in OS No.23 of 1987, appeal Suit is filed against the judgment and decree in OS No.25 of 1987.3. For proper appreciation of the case, it is...
Sudheer Srivastava Vs. Election Commissioner and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD(Cri)274; 1999(6)ALT140
ORDERM.S. Liberhan, C.J.1. The objections raised by the Office need not be gone into as we are deciding the writ petition on merits.2. This is a Public Interest Litigation based on apprehensions and assumptions and not on relevant facts.3. This writ petition has been filed on the basis of some statements, alleged to have been made by the Commissioner of Police, Purana Haveli, Hyderabad, published in Deccan Chronicle on 17-9-1999, that the police as a measure of preventive arrest, picked up 3733 persons. It is contended that the persons, alleged to have been arrested as a preventive measure, were denied the , fundamental right of right to vote in the Parliamentary and Assembly elections that were held in four phases in the State.4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that there is no provision either in the Cr.P.C. or in the Police Manual for preventive arrest. No person, alleged to have been arrested, is named. Nothing is shown in the writ petition as to how the...
New India Assurance Co., Ltd., Kakinada Vs. Kancherla Suryavathi and O ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-04-1999
Reported in: II(2000)ACC446; 2001ACJ1902; 2000(1)ALD149; 2000(2)ALT396
1.This appeal was filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited, Kakinada, against the order and decree dated 29-3-1994 in OP No.85 of 1990 on the file of the Chairman (III Additional District Judge), Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kakinada, wherein the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,69,0007- for the death of the deceased Kancharla Venkata Suryanarayana Rao, in a motor vehicle accident that was occurred on 24-9-1989, at about 4-30 p.m. when the deceased was going on his scooter bearing No.ATP-8309 alongwith his brother's daughter, 4 years and his daughter, on Samalkota Kakinada Road, towards Kakinada, a taxi bearing No.AAW-333 coming in the opposite direction being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the scooter, as a result of which the deceased sustained severe injuries and he was shifted to Government General Hospital, Kakinada, and he succumbed to the injuries on 11-10-1989 and the scooter was also badly damaged. It is stated that the ...
B. Venkata Govinda Raju Vs. Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, A. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-04-1999
Reported in: 2000(3)ALD198; 1999(6)ALT603
ORDER1. Rule Nisi.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner is a retail licence holder under IL 24, as such he is authorised to sell Indian Made Foreign liquor (IMFL). He was running the business under the name and style of M/s. Sri Devi Wines, Yellamanchili. The licence was obtained in the year 1998-1999 and it was renewed for the year 1999-2000. The 4th respondent, according to the petitioner, started interfering with the business of the petitioner and the 2nd respondent issued a proceedings on 17-5-1999 wherein he showed the 4th respondent as partner of the firm for which the licence had been given to the petitioner. This order reads as under:'In view of the representation of Sri K. V.J.A. Naidu (95%) shareholder of M/s Sri Dcvi Wines, IL24, Yellamanchili as per partnership deed, Sri K.V.J.A. Naidu S/o. Narasinga Rao, resident of Ganga devipeta is included as a partner with the share of 95% of M/s. Sri Devi Wines, Yellamanchili of Visakhapatnam district under Rule...
Divisional Manager, Apsrtc and Another Vs. E. Raja Reddy and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-04-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)ALD735; 1999(5)ALT450
ORDER1. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation in this writ petition challenges the Award passed by Labour Court, Godavarikhani, directing reinstatement of the first respondent herein into service of the Corporation, as Conductor with continuity of service and with all other attendant benefits, including full back wages. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the Award dated: 28-8-1989 in ID No.271 of 1989 on the file of the Labour Court, Godavarikhani and quash the same.2. It may be necessary to notice few relevant facts for adjudicating the issues that arise for consideration and as to the validity of the impugned Award. The first respondent herein was served with a charge memo dated 23-9-1986 framing the following four charges against him:1. For having reissued three tickets of Rs.4.50 ps. Denomination bearing Nos.606 to 608 at Stage No. 13 which were already issued and accounted having sold at the stage No.11 in th...
A. Sidharta and Others Vs. Ntr University of Health Sciences and Other ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD196; 1999(6)ALT333
ORDER1. The petitioners, 14 in number, who are studying decree in Physiotherapy-Ill Semester in respondent-University filed this writ petition questioning the action of the respondent-University in detaining them in the III Semester on the ground that they did not secure 50% of the aggregate marks in the examination whereas under the Regulation No.15, a candidate has to be declared as passed in the examinationif he gets 40% marks in theory and if orals are also there, the candidate should get aggregate of 50% marks in both theory and oral put together.2. The Counsel for the respondent-University strenuously opposed the relief sought for in this writ petition by contending that unless a student gets 50% marks, he cannot be declared as passed in the examination whether oral examination is there or not.3. To appreciate the rival contentions of the parties it is useful to extract regulations framed by the University for this course :'Regulation XV: A candidate shall be declared to have pas...
K. Vishnuvardhan Reddy Vs. District Collector, Kurnool and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD187; 1999(6)ALT217
ORDERM.S. Liberhan, CJ 1. In these two writ petitions, the petitioners who havecontested in the General Election pertaining to 185-Nandikotkur Assembly Constituency as independent candidates have sought for a mandamus to the respondents to permit the counting agents on their behalf in the counting hall at the time of counting of votes on 6-10-1999 in respect of the said constituency, on the apprehension that they will not be permitted to take the counting agents.2. Curiously, no order rejecting the representations of the petitioners has been produced. Further, the counting is scheduled to be held on 6-10-1999. The Returning Officer, being the administrative head for the supervision and conduct of elections of the constituency, taking into account the exigencies such as space available, number of counting agents to be allowed in the counting hall and other aspects, will take appropriate decision regarding the grant of permission to allow the counting agents in the counting hall. The Ret...
Regional Director, Esi Corporation Vs. Kohinoor Glass Factory (P) Ltd. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD581; 2000(2)ALT106
1. The Regional Joint Director, ESI Corporation filed this appeal aggrieved by the order passed by the Employees-Insurance Court, Hyderabad, in El Case No.16 of 1993 dated 24-3-1994 wherein it was held that the petitioner-factory has not employed any person for wages during the relevant period and hence, the petitioner is not liable to pay the contributionsas claimed by the respondent-Corporation and notices dated 10-6-1992 and 22-10-1992 claiming an amount of Rs.5,752.60 and Rs.9,650/- by the respondent-Corporation are set aside.2. The brief facts of the case are that the first respondent i.e., Kohinoor Glass Factory Limited, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad, was demanded by the Corporation through its notices 10-6-1992 and 22-10-1992 an amount of Rs.5750.60 ps. and Rs.9,650/-towards contribution for its employees engaged for the period 1984 to 1987. According to the appellant herein, the petitioner factory situated at Sanathnagar was covered under Section 2(12) of ESI Act. As per Section 40 of...
Stat of Bank of India, Kothapet Vs. Kandula Satyanand and Anothers
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALD617; 2000(2)ALT363
1. The plaintiff Nationalised Bank is the appellant beforethis Court. The suit, OS No.187 of 1980 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Rajahmundry was filed by the plaintiff-Bank for recovery of a sum of Rs.75,374-45 being the amount due on a promissory note and also based on the mortgage bond.2. For the sake of convenience the parties to this appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.3. The trial Court decreed the suit. However, while decreeing the suit the trial Court held that Section 21A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 is not retrospective and consequently held that the defendants are entitled to the benefit of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Agriculturists Relief Act, 1938 (Act IV of 1938). Aggrieved by the said finding, the plaintiff-Bank has filed this appeal.4. The only question that falls for consideration in this appeal is:-'Whether in view of the insertion of Section 21-A in the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 by Banking Law (Amendment) Act, 1983 (Act I of 19...
Khaja MoinuddIn Khan and Others Vs. S.P. Ranga Rao and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)ALD461; 2000(2)ALT596
1. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree in OS No. 132 of 1982 dated 28-12-1983 on the file of theAdditional Chief Judge, City Civil Court-cum Additional Special Judge for SPE and ACB cases, Hyderabad, the first defendant preferred this appeal.2. The appellant herein and the respondent Nos.2 to 5 are the owners of the plaint schedule property. The appellant is the manager of the property. It appears that there were some legal proceedings pending against the property, including proposals for acquisition of the schedule land by the A.P. Housing Board. For the purpose of conducting the said litigation, the appellant approached the first respondent-plaintiff for a loan of Rs.20,000/-. The first respondent agreed to lend the money on certain terms evidenced by Ex.A1, a registered agreement. It can be gathered from Ex.A1 agreement that various proceedings mentioned therein are pending against the suit schedule property. The relevant portion of the agreement for the purpose of this case reads ...