Andhra Pradesh Court November 2000 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.
Chilukoti Srinivasa Rao Vs. Adidam Mohan Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD128; 2001(1)ALT194
ORDER1. This second 1999 in A.S.Nos.4 and 79 of 1999 on the file of the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada under which the plaintiff's suit OS No.1310 of 1996 against the defendant-landlord restraining him from evicting the tenant otherwise than due course of law has been decreed and similarly OS No.88 of 1997 filed by the plaintiff - landlord for evicting the defendant - tenant from the suit schedule premises has also been decreed along with the relief of damages for use and occupation of the suit premises. Thissecond appeal is filed by the defendant -tenant in OS No.88 of 1997 against the dismissal of the appeal and decreeing the suit for eviction against him. 2. For the convenience of the reference, the parties will be referred to as the tenant and landlord respectively. The appellant shall be referred to as the tenant and the respondent as the landlord. 3. The facts leading to this appeal may be stated as follows: The tenant obtained the suit premises on lease for running a pr...
Gokavarapu Ramalingam Vs. Kodur Estate and Investments, Madras and Oth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-24-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD468; 2001(1)ALT473
1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26-11-1984 in AS No.95 of 1981 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram under which the judgment dated 12-4-1980 in OS No.414 of 1974 on the file of the Principal District Munsif at Vizianagaram decreeing the suit was confirmed.2. The facts relevant to this appeal may be stated briefly as follows:Defendant is the appellant herein and the respondents are the plaintiffs, Parties shall be referred to hereinafter as they were arrayed in the trial Court.3. The plaintiffs filed OS No.414 of 1974 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Vizianagaram for evicting thedefendant from the suit schedule property and for recovery of rents and for mesne profits. The case of the plaintiffs is that the 3rd plaintiff was the owner of the suit property. He conveyed the same to the 2nd plaintiff under registered sale deed dated 3 0-12-1971 and relinquishment deed dated 31-1-1972. Subsequently, the 2nd plaintiff was admitte...
D. Srinivasa Rao and ors. Vs. State of A.P., P.R. and R.D. (Pts Iii) D ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-24-2000
Reported in: 2001(4)ALT75
G. Bikshapathy, J.1. Both the Writ Petitions can be disposed of by a common judgment.2. In these Writ Petitions, the constitutional validity of G.O.Ms. No. 71 issued by the Government, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (PTS-III), dated 29-6-2000 framing the rules called A.P. Panchayat Raj (Auction of Sand in the Water Courses vesting in Gram Panchayat) Rules, 2000 (hereinafter called the 'Auction Rules' for short) is assailed with consequential challenge to the auction notifications issued in pursuance of the said G.O. The Rules stipulated the method and manner of auction of sand. The notifications were issued for auctioning various sand quarries in pursuance of the G.O.Ms. No. 71. It is the prime contention of the petitioners that impugned G.O.Ms. No. 71 is incompetent and ultra vires the Constitution and the provisions of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. It is further stated that even the Rules framed under G.O.Ms. No. 71 are illegal and offending Articles 14 and 21 of the Constit...
Patta Appalanarasamma Vs. Principal Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD301; 2001(1)ALT358
1. This is a revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India at the instance of the second defendant in OS No.253 of 1997 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam (hereafter called 'the trial Court'). The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders passed by the trial Court in IANo.325 of 1997 in OS No.253 of 1997 dated 10-4-1997. By the said order, the trial Court directed the petitioner and the third respondent herein to furnish third party security to the money claimed in the suit by the second respondent within 15 days from the date of the order failing which the petitioner and the third respondent were restrained from contesting the suit and filing the written statements. 2. Briefly the facts leading to filing of this revision petition are as follows: the parties are called by their status in the suit in OS No.253 of 1997. The plaintiff (second respondent herein) filed a suit for recovery of money with interest and for permanent injunction restraini...
Ballari Rajendra Vs. G. Gurumurthy and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD423; 2001(1)ALT430
1. This Appeal is filed by the claimant having been aggrieved by the award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation-cum-AssistantCommissioner of Labour, Circle-1, Guntur, in WC Case No. 155 of 1994.2. It is the case of the claimant that he is a lorry cleaner and that during the course of his employment under the 1st respondent, on 1-7-1993 at about 3.00 a.m., while he was going as Cleaner on Lorry bearing No.AP-02-V-0990 with a load of poultry feed, an accident took place near Kallur bye pass road within the limits of Kallur Police Station. As a result of which, he fractured his right leg below the knee joint and right collar bone. Further, the great toe and second toe of his left leg were amputated. Therefore, he claimed an amount of Rs. 1,10,685/- as compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act.3. During the course of enquiry, the claimant examined himself as AW1 and the Doctor who treated him was examined as AW2. Exs.A1 to A5 were marked. On behalf of the responden...
Bank of India Vs. V. Swaroop Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2000
Reported in: AIR2001AP260; 2001(2)ALT388
N.Y. Hanumanthappa, Acting C.J. 1. The defendant in the suit, viz. Bank of India represented by its Zonal Manager is the appellant in the present appeal whereas the plaintiff in the suit is the Cross-Objector. 2. The appeal and the Cross Objections are preferred against the judgment and decree dated 2nd September, 1996 passed by the learned First Additional Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad in O.S. No. 1548 of 1993. 3. The appeal has been filed to set aside the impugned judgment and decree of the Court below by which the suit of the plaintiff was decreed in a sum of Rs. 39,461.10 paise with 24% interest per annum on Rs. 22,942.50 paise from the date of institution of the suit till realisation with proportionate costs. 4. It is to be noted here that the original claim of the plaintiff in the suit was for Rs. 7,72,710.19 paise as on the date of the suit i.e., 31-12-1993 together with interest @ 24.5% with quarterly rests on the amount of Rs. 5,48,786.50 and costs. The plaintiff filed t...
Shalimar Chemical Works Ltd., Calcutta Vs. Surender Oil and Dal Mills ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALT253
1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree of the learned III Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in OS No.1 of 1995 dated 28-9-1998. The appellant is the plaintiff in the suit, The suit was filed seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringing the registered trade mark 'Shalimar' of the plaintiff by selling, marketing or offering for sale edible oil products bearing the name 'Shalimar' on containers, labels, wrappers or using any name identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trade mark and for connected reliefs.2. It is the case of the appellant that it is a company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, which has been carrying on the business of manufacturing and trading of high grade coconut oil used for cooking as well as manufacturing of various toilet products under the distinctive trade mark 'Shalimar'. The said trade mark was duly registered under Class 3 and Class 29 under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 195...
K. Seetharam Reddy Vs. Smt. K. Radhika Rani and ors. and Smt. Ch. Kast ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALT(Cri)175; [2002]112CompCas204(AP)
T. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. Since the parties are the same and as common questions of law and fact are involved both the criminal petitions can be disposed of together.2. The petitioner is the second accused in C. C. No. 563 of 2000 and C. C. No. 506 of 2000. The first accused in both the cases is one Mr. C. J. Reddy. The complainant in both the cases is common.3. The petitioner seeks to quash both the cases filed against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act'), on the premise that he is arrayed in the complaint neither as a partner nor as a director of any firm or the company, as the case may be, and inasmuch as he has been arrayed as an individual and since the Act does not envisage any vicarious liability except under Section 141 of the said Act, the proceedings against him in both the criminal cases cannot be maintained.4. In the complaint, filed against the petitioner, inter alia, it has been averred that Al is the working director and A2 is ...
Shalimar Chemical Works Ltd. Vs. Surender Oil and Dal Mills (Refinerie ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2000
Reported in: [2004]119CompCas535(AP)
G. Bikshapathy, J.1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree of the learned III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O.S. No. 1 of 1995, dated September 28, 1998. The appellant is the plaintiff in the suit. The suit was filed seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringing the registered trade mark 'Shalimar' of the plaintiff by selling, marketing or offering for sale edible oil products bearing the name 'Shalimar' on containers, labels, wrappers or using any name identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trade mark and for connected reliefs.2. It is the case of the appellant that it is a company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, which has been carrying on the business of manufacturing and trading of high grade coconut oil used for cooking as well as manufacturing of various toilet products under the distinctive trade mark 'Shalimar'. The said trade mark was duly registered under class 3 and class 29 under the...
Nellore District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd., Nellore Vs. President ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD73; 2001(1)ALT125
ORDER1. Whether the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court has jurisdiction to entertain the application for setting aside the ex parte award after expiry of 30 days of its publication is the question that falls for consideration in this writ petition. The industrial dispute arising out of the punishment of reduction of two increments without cumulative effect imposed by the management/writ petitioner was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication on the dispute raised by the President, the Nellore District Co-operative Central Bank Employees Association, the petitioner herein and the same was numbered as ID No. 109 of 1994. 2. On receipt of the notice of the reference, both the claimant/employee and employer filed statements and counterstatements. Subsequently the employer remained ex parte and after recording the evidence of the employee, award was passed on 31-10-1997 holding that the management of the Nellore Co-operative Central Bank Limited, Nellore. Writ petitioner herein is not ju...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »