Andhra Pradesh Court August 1999 Judgments

A. Ramanamma Vs. M. Ramakrishnaiah and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(5)ALT529

B.S. Raikote, J.1. The original defendant No. 5 has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dt. 30-9-1988 passed by the Subordinate Judge at Tirupathi in A.S.No. 109/1981. By this impugned judgment and decree the appellate Court dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Principal District Munsiff at Tirupathi in O.S.No. 720/1978 dt. 23-9-1981.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-defendant No. 5 contended that the impugned judgments and decrees of both the Courts below are contrary to the material evidence on record. He further submitted that the entire approach of the both the Courts below is illegal and the Courts below are in error in drawing adverse inference against the appellant for not producing the agreement of sale dt. 10-6-1974 executed by the defendant No. 1 in favour of the appellant. He further submitted that in view of a decree by a competent Court granting specific performance of the said agreement in O.S.No. ...

Abdul Ali Vs. the Assistant Accounts Officer, E.R.O., A.P. Trans Co. L ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha, PresidentThe complainant seeks to agitate by way of the present complaint matters and questions which are, in our view, clearly beyond the jurisdiction of this Commission. 2. The complainant has set up a small scale unit and he has been receiving energy from the A.P. State Electricity Board (A.P.S.E.B. for short) now A.P. Transco LTD. While so on 23.12.1997 his unit had a visit from the officials of the A.P.S.E.B. and, on the ground that he was caught pilfering energy, his service connection was disconnected and supply of energy was stopped. He then approached the Honble High Court of Andhra Pradesh by way of the Writ Petition No. 892 of 1998. The Honble High Court by order dated 15.10.1998 directed continuance of supply pending enquiry into the pilferage by the authorities concerned subject to the condition of the complainant depositing in all Rs. 1,43,000/- being th of the provisional assessment made of the value of energy allegedly pilfered by the complainant. The compl...

Mamidi Naga Damayanthi Alias Jupudi Naga Damayanthi Vs. Jupudi Padmava ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(1)ALD286

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred by the 4th defendant being aggrieved by the judgement and order dated 12-11-1997 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge at Narsapur in IA NO......./1997 in (Sr. No.1320 of 1997).By the impugned order the Court below rejected the IA No....../1997 in (Sr.No.1320of 1997) filed to condone the delay of 147 days in filing a petition to set aside the exports decree.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant-4th defendant strenuously contended that the impunged order is illegal and without jurisdiction and the Court below has erred in rejecting the petition. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents supported the impugned order. The appellant-4th defendant was brought on record as the LR of the original defendant No.3. The said defendant No.3 died leaving behind defendant No.4 wife anddefendant No.5 son. They were brought on record as the LRs. of defendant No.3 vide order of the Court dated 13-6-1995 in IA No.184 of 1995. Undisputedly def...

P.C.G. Roy Vs. National Commission for Sc and St, A.P. and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(3)ALD32; 2000(2)ALT348

ORDER1. The petitioner who is working as Deputy Manager (Marketing) in respondent No.3-company is assailing the order of his posting in Mechanical Section of Engineering Department at the factory by order dated 18-3-1998 and the consequential Order No.43 of 1998, dated 5-6-1998 designating him as Deputy Manager (Mechanical).2. A few facts which are relevant are that 3rd respondent is a Central Government Enterprise incorporated on 14-7-1983 under the Companies Act. It is jointly promoted by Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited and A.P. Industrial Development Corporation for the purpose of manufacturing Engineering Polymer known as Poly-Tetra Flouro Ethylene Pursuant to an advertisement in July, 1989, the petitioner applied for the post of Engineer (ADCS/Mech) but nevertheless, after interview, he was appointed as Marketing Officer in the time-scale of Rs.960-50-1610 vide letter dated 8-3-1989. He satisfactorily completed probation period of 12 months and was confirmed vide Part-II Order...

Dewan Bahadur Ramgopal Mills Ltd. Vs. Appellate Authority for Industri ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(5)ALD21; 1999(4)ALT412; [1999]98CompCas398(AP)

ORDER1. The order passed by the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction on 13th April, 1999 in Appeal No.144/98 has been challenged in this writ petition. Counters have been filed. The matter has been argued in detail. One of the contentions of the respondents was that similar matter had been taken up in the Delhi High Court which was dismissed and later on an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court which was withdrawn with permission to file a review before the Delhi High Court. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that review has been filed. The contention of the learned Counsel for the respondents was that since the Delhi High Court was ceased of the matter therefore this Court should not go into entertaining this writ petition. I have seen the copy of the writ petition which was pending before the Delhi High Court and also the order passed by the Delhi High Court. The Delhi High Court passed the order on 14-10-1998. The order against which the pr...

V. Srirama Murthy Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, General Administra ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(5)ALD7; 1999(4)ALT399

ORDER1. The petitioner in the instant writ petition invokes the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring the order passed by the third respondent in R.Dis. No.B2/16194/89, dated nil-8-1991, as illegal, arbitrary, erroneous, void and without jurisdiction. The petitioner accordingly prays to set aside the said order. The said order hereinafter shall be referred to as the impugned order.2. The fads leading to the filing of this writ petition may briefly be noticed, so far as they arc relevant for the disposal ofthis writ petitioner. The petitioner as at present is working as Grade-I Assistant in Food Corporation of India (for short 'FCI'). He was originally appointed as Grade-111 Assistant on 8-1-1976 under the quota reserved for Scheduled Tribes (for short 'STs') at Visakhapatnam. The petitioner claims that he belongs to 'Kotiya Bentho Oriya' community, which is recognised as ST. There is ...

Annavarapu Narayana and Others Vs. Dist. Manager, Food Corporation of ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(5)ALD349; 1999(6)ALT679; (2000)ILLJ670AP

ORDERR. Ramanujam, J.1. The unsuccessful writ petitioners in Writ Petition No.8584 of 1998 are the appellants herein. They are 13 in number. They claim that they are working as casual labourers in the service of the Food Corporation of India through a contractor. Stating that their services were illegally discontinued by the 1st respondent-District Manager,Food Corporation of India, they filed the said writ petition seeking for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in discontinuing them as illegal and directing him to continue them as casual labour.2. A learned single Judge of this Court, having held that the order of the 1st respondent does not suffer from any illegality, dismissed that writ petition at the admission stage. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned single Judge gave liberty to the appellants herein 'to avail such remedy as may be available to them in law and in such an event, the matter is required to be con...

Pressteels and Fabrications Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Chief Engineer, Electricity ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(5)ALD459; 1999(5)ALT429

1. This is an application for appointment of an independent arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Arbitration Act').2. It is common ground that the purchase order for erection of Bommur, Ramachandrapuram 132 KV SC line was given to the applicant by the petitioner through order No. CPT-321/APT-38/76-2620/77, dated 7-1-1978. The entrusted work was completed by the applicant some time in the month of August, 1981. The erected line was handed over to the respondent on 31-8-1981. The final bill is yet to be finalised and paid to the applicant.3. The case of the applicant in brief is that inspite of attempts when the respondent did not repay the final bill correctly, on 8-11-1996 the applicant prepared the final bill amounting to Rs.23,26,662/-, but the respondent did not pay any heed to it. Thereafter through letter dated 23-12-1996, the applicant nominated one Sri K. Krishan Rao, retired Engineer-in-Chief on his behalf and asked the respo...

Padmavathi Constructions Vs. Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(5)ALD609

ORDER1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of a writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of writ of prohibition restraining the Respondent No.5-H Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court from proceeding with the OP No.161of 1998 filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 4 for the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the petition.2. The writ petitioner is a partnership firm, which entered into a contract with the 1st respondent-Corporation. When the Zonal Manager, Tirupathi of the 1st respondent invoked the bank guarantees issued by the State Bank of Hyderabad, the petitioner herein filed WP No. 1161 of 1996 questioning the said action. Though the said writ petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge, an appeal was filed in WA No.836 of 1996. In the course of hearing, the parties have agreed for referring the dispute to the arbitration. Hence ( Sri Justice K. Punnaiah was appointed as Arbitral Tribunal for r...

Transport Corporation of India Vs. G. Ramireddy and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(6)ALD571; 1999(6)ALT801

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was filed by the Transport corporation of India, through its Manager, aggrieved by the order dated 4-10-1991 in IA No.612 of 1990 in OP No.513 of 1983 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Dist. Judge), Nizamabad, whereby it dismissed the above IPA filed by the appellant, on the ground that the petition which was filed for the same relief i.e., which was filed for condonation of delay in filing the petition for setting aside the ex parte order is barred by Order 9, Rule 9 CPC and therefore, it is not maintainable.2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellant that the order passed by the Tribunal dismissing the IA No.612 of 1990 in OP No.513 of 1983 to condone the delay as not maintainable in law is illegal, erroneous and unjust. It is further submitted that the dismissal of IA No.1378 of 1988 is not a bar for the maintainability of IA No.612 of 1990 and therefore, should have allowed IA No.612 of 1990 in the inter...