Andhra Pradesh Court August 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. Kishan Lal (Died) and ors. Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)ALT55
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. No representation for the respondent and even on the last adjournment also.2. The grievance of the revision petitioners is that no notice has been ordered to be given to the judgment-debtor before the proclamation and for settlement of terms etc. as envisaged under Order 21, Rule 66 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Along with the revision petition a certified copy of the docket sheet proceedings has been filed. A perusal of the said proceedings sheet shows that on 22-7-1996 process was shown to have been returned and as sale papers had not been submitted, the Execution Petition was ordered to be called on 11-9-1996. Thereafter the subsequent proceedings on the docket do not disclose any order of the lower Court for issuing process to the judgment-debtor. The docket sheet proceedings further show that on 23-4-1997 sale papers filed were checked and found in order. Therefore, the lower Court ordered proclamation in Deccan Chronicle News Paper and sale to be...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Janarasupally Kotiratnamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)ALT745
A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. All these appeals by the Insurance Company arise out of the common orders and decrees dated 22-10-1994 in three batches of petitions i.e., (1) O.P.Nos.10/93, 11/93, 12/93 and 14/93; (2) O.P.Nos. 13/93 and 65/93; and (3) O.P.Nos. 15/93 and 16/93 on the file of I Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karimnagar. As the question of law involved in all these appeals is one and the same, 1 propose to dispose them of by this common judgment.2. C.M.A.Nos. 30, 32, 31 and 34 of 1995 which arise out of O.P. Nos. 10/93, 12/93, 11/93 and 14/93 respectively are filed by the same claimants. O.P.No. 10/93 is filed Under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short 'the Act') and O.P.Nos. 12/93 is filed Under Section 140 of the Act for the death of Seenu, s/o claimant No. 1 in the above O.Ps. O.P.Nos. 11/93 and 14/93 are filed Under Sections 166 and 140 of the Act by the husband of the first respondent herein and father of respondents 2 and 3 herein. C...
Kotam Abbai Dora Vs. Election Commission of India Rep. by the Secretar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)ALT490
ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. This writ petition has been filed questioning the disqualification of the petitioner from contesting the General Election, be it Assembly or Parliament for a period of three years from the date of passing of the order i.e., 07-8-1998 by the Election Commission of India. Consequently the petitioner is ineligible to contest in the ensuing elections. The last date for filing nomination is tomorrow i.e., 28-8-1999. The petitioner in 1988 Assembly Elections contested from Ellavaram 38-Constituency, but he was defeated. Whether succeeded or defeated in the election, it makes no difference so far as the obligation to furnish the election expenditure is concerned. Such an obligation is cast upon Under Section 77 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short 'the Act')- The time set is 30 days from the date of election for furnishing the expenditure incurred and the District Election Officer (District Collector) is the authority with whom the said accoun...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Janarasupalli Kotiratnamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ2131
A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. All these appeals by the insurance company arise out of the common orders and decrees dated 22.10.1994 in three batches of petitions, i.e. (1) O.P. Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 14 of 1993; (2) O.P. Nos. 13 and 65 of 1993; and (3) O.P. Nos. 15 and 16 of 1993 on the file of I Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karim-nagar. As the question of law involved in all these appeals is one and the same, I propose to dispose them of by this common judgment.2. C.M.A. Nos. 30, 32, 31 and 34 of 1995 which arise out of O.P. Nos. 10, 12, 11 and 14 of 1993 respectively are filed by the same claimants. O.P. No. 10 of 1993 is filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short 'the Act') and O.P. No. 12 of 1993 is filed under Section 140 of the Act for the death of Sreenu s/o claimant No. 1 in the above O.Ps. O.P. Nos. 11 and 14 of 1993 are filed under Sections 166 and 140 of the Act (Sic.) the husband of the respondent No. 1 herein and father of responden...
Gouripala Manemma Vs. Apsrtc
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-1999
Reported in: II(2000)ACC708; 2001ACJ901; 2000(5)ALD479; 2000(3)ALT456
ORDER1. This appeal is filed by the appellant-petitioner being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 24-9-1992 passed in OP No. 103 of 1990 on the file of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 11-10-1989 the deceased G. Ganesh aged 20 years along with his friends went to see a movie and as they did not get tickets they boarded the APSRTC bus plying on route No.107 belonging to Dilsukhnagar bus depot at the RTC cross roads to return to their house by changing the bus at Nalgonda cross roads. At that time, the driver of thebus accelerated the bus in a hurry in a rash and negligent manner without caring to see if all the passengers entered the bus safely or not and suddenly twisted the bus and that the deceased was thrown out of the bus and received grievous injuries. Even though the other passengers shouted to stop the bus, the driver did not stop the bus and he stopped the bus only at Charminar cross roads. The friends of the deceas...
Nataraj theatre Vs. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-1999
Reported in: 1999(5)ALD693; 1999(5)ALT274
ORDER1. Messers Nataraj theatre has filed WP No.21691 of 1995 praying for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the memo issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, the 1st respondent herein bearing No.1730/Genl.A1/ 94-3 dated 23-5-1995 (the impugned order) as illegal and arbitrary and also to set aside all the consequential orders issued by the Licensing Authority under the A.P. Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955 (Act No.4 of 1955, hereinafter referred to as the Act). The other writ petition being WP No.30691 of 1998 is filed by the Chand Talkies questioning the same impugned order. Messers Chand Talkies also questioned Rule 10-A of the A.P. Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1979 (hereinafter called as the Rules) as ultra-vires and unconstitutional insofar as the same imposes time limit for reduction of seating capacity in the petitioner's cinema theatre.2. As both the writ petitions came to be framed in the same set of facts and circumstances and raise common questions of ...
Bijjur Narasa Reddy and Others Vs. Ramulu and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)ALD157
ORDER1. The defendants 2 and 3 are the appellants herein. The Suit OS No.128 of 1982 was filed by the plaintiffs on behalf of minors for partition of movable and immoveable properties shown in A and B Schedule of the plaint. For the sake of convenience the parties to this appeal hereinafter will be referred to in accordance with their status in the suit.2. The brief averments in the plaint are as follows:D1 and the plaintiffs are the members of the Hindu Joint Family. The lands in Survey No.123/A, admeasuring 4 acres and Survey No. 123 admeasuring 3 acres situated at Sonala village of Boath taluq and a house bearing No.2-48, situated at Sonala shown in A schedule to the plaint are the ancestral and joint family properties, in which the plaintiffs and Dl have equal shares. Besides this, the family has movable properties shown in B schedule. The plaintiffs and D1 got equal shares in those properties also. It is the case of the plaintiffs that Dl was addicted to all bad vices including dr...
Syed Shameer Makandar and Others Vs. Syed Ahmed and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)ALD343; 1999(5)ALT406
1. Heard Counsel for both sides. This CMA is directed against the ad-interim order dated 19-5-1999 directing the parties to maintain status quo as on that date while ordering notice on the petition for temporary injunction filed by the respondents-plaintiffs. The order, which is a cryptic order, reads as follows:'19-5-1999: Orders pronounced. Perused the affidavit of the petitioner. Also perused the plaint. In the plaint the Government and Madanapalle Municipality are also defendants. Also perused the documents enclosed to the plaint. Issue urgent notices to the respondents-1 to 5 through Court and RP by 31-5-1999. In the meanwhile parties are directed tomaintain status quo as on today. Batta shall be paid within 3 days fromtoday.' 2. The order is assailed mainly on the ground that it is bereft of reasons and it is contrary to the mandatory provisions of Rule 3 to Order 39 CPC.3. The material on record reveals that there is a long history preceding the present suit filed by the respond...
Akasim Bi and Others Vs. T.G. Lakshmayya Thimmayya Setty and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)ALD402; 1999(6)ALT151
1. This appeal is filedagainst the decree and order passed in EA No.36 of 1982 in EP No.182 of 1980 in OS No.32 of 1979 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Adoni, dated 30-7-1986, dismissing the same which was filed under Order 21, Rule 90 CPC. Appellants herein are the petitioners-judgment debtors in the EA. They filed the EA seeking to set aside the sale of immovable properties in this case on the ground that the sale is vitiated by material irregularity or fraud in publication and conduction of sale.2. Brief facts: In order to execute the decree which was obtained by the 1st respondent, the EP was filed under Order21, Rule II CPC against the appellants, who are the legal representatives of one late Janda Husen Sab (the original debtor), praying to realise the decretal debtby selling the EP schedule immovable properties of late Janda Husen Sab which are now in the hands of the appellants-JDrs. In the EP, itself, it was mentioned that the EP schedule properties were attached...
S.F. HussaIn Vs. Apsrtc, Hyd. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-1999
Reported in: 1999(6)ALD759; 1999(5)ALT664
ORDER1. Heard Sri A.K Jaya Prakash Rao, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.V. Ramulu, the learned Standing Counsel for the Andhra Pradesh State Road Corporation.2. The petitioner in the instant writ petition challenges the order passed by the Appellate Authority dated 14-6-1991 in so far as it concerns with the imposition of punishment reverting the petitioner as Assistant Depot Clerk permanently. The petitioner also questions the order passed by the Reviewing Authority confirming the order passed by the Appellate Authority, through proceedings dated 30-6-1992.3. Facts in brief may be noticed before adverting to the question that would arise for consideration. The petitioner was served with a charge-sheet dated 11-1-1990, while he was working as Depot Clerk under the control and jurisdiction of the 4th respondent. The following charges were levelled against him:'Charge No. 1: For having failed to discharge his legitimate duties which has resulted in shortage of T & P item...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »