Andhra Pradesh Court December 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.
Guntur Tobaccos Ltd., Guntur Vs. Apseb and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD473; 2001(1)ALT719
ORDERBILAL NAZKI, J :1. The plaintiffs-respondents filed a suit before the District Judge, Guntur being OS No.15 of 1973 against the appellant-defendant. The suit was filed for possession of the plaint schedule property along with profits from the date of the suit till the delivery of possession and costs of the suit. The facts which led to filing of the suit needs to be narrated in detail. According to the averments in the plaint the Guntur Power and Light Limited (hereinafter referred as GPL) was a limited company constituted for the purpose of running an electrical undertaking to supply electricity to Guntur area. It was granted licence for the aforesaid purpose under the provisions of Indian Electricity Act, 1910. For the purpose of the undertaking the GPL acquired various properties including the plaint schedule property. In the year 1945 the GPL leased out the schedule property to a sister concern namely Guntur Tobaccos Ltd., which was defendant in the suit and the GPL executed a...
Gujjari Vittal Vs. Padala Sadanandam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD460; 2001(1)ALT461
ORDER1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 24-10-1997 passed by District Munsif, Andole at Jogipet in 1A No.155 of 1997 arising out of OS No.33 of 1991 whereby and whereunder petitioner's application for amendment of plaint filed in terms of Order VI, Rule 17 CPC was dismissed. By reason of the said application the petitioner sought for the following amendment. '(a) In the plaint below the cause title the claim mentioned as suit for perpetual injunction may be deleted and in the same place 'the suit for recovery of possession of the suit house' may be added. In para No.2 of the plaint line one may be amended as that 'the plaintiff is the owner and was in possession over' by deleting the para two of the first line. In para No.4 of the plaint lines 16 to 19 may be amended as 'the defendant with such evil intention and with the help of unsocial elements came on the suit land on 16-8-1977 and dispossessed the plaintiff from the suit house and illegally occupied' by ...
Y. Venkata Sastry (Died) by Lrs. and Others Vs. State Bank of India, B ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD549; 2001(1)ALT679; (2001)IILLJ407AP
ORDER1. The writ petition is filed by one Y. Venkata Sastry (hereafter referred to as the first petitioner). He prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents namely, the State Bank of India (SBI) and its officials to promote him to Middle Management Grade-II (MM Gr.II) with effect from 1-8-1983 by fixing his pay at Rs.2,825/- p.m. in the said grade after declaring the action of the respondents in fixing his basic pay at Rs.2,325/- as illegal and arbitrary. He also prayed for other consequential directions. During the pendency of the writ petition, the first petitioner died and by an order dated 29-7-1999, his wife and son are brought on record as legal representatives and they contested the case. 2. Briefly stated that admitted facts are as follows. In 1976, the first petitioner was placed under suspension on the allegation that he committed certain irregularities in issuing demand drafts. At that time he was working as officer in MM Gr.II. After conducting enquiry in accorda...
Shri Shakthi Lpg Limited Vs. Govt of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Civ ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-2000
Reported in: 1999(1)ALD458; 1999(1)ALT428; 1999(1)APLJ160; 1999(1)LS129
ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J 1. This writ petition has been filed questioning the action of the 4th respondent in sealing the bottling plant of the petitioner asserting that the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Petroleum Products (Licensing and Regulation of Supplies) Order, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Order of 1980'), which was framed in exercise of the powers under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, cannot be invoked against the petitioner.2. The petitioner is a bottling unit established at Nemam village near Kakinada of East Godavari district pursuant to the liberalised policy of the Government relating to Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG). Before this liberalised policy, the Government PetroleumCompanies enjoyed the monopoly. In exercise of the powers contained under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, Liquid Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Central Order of 1993') has been issued, which enables the ...
Bommidi Rajamallu Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD(Cri)337; 2001(1)ALT(Cri)193; 2001CriLJ1319
Vaman Rao, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment in S.C. No. 590/1993, dt. 28-2-1995 on the file of the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in which the appellant-accused has been convicted for the offences under Sections 498-A and 306, I.P.C., and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- and imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- respectively with appropriate sentence in default of payment of fine and both sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2-3. The case of the prosecution may be stated briefly as follows :The deceased, Shiva Kumari is the daughter of P.W. 1. She was married to the accused eight years prior to her death. She had a son and two daughters through the accused. The marital life went on happily for six years after the marriage. Thereafter, the accused started quarrelling with the deceased-Shiva Kumari and used to beat her in a drunken state. The deceased has ...
T.V. Venugopal Vs. Ushodaya Enterprises and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALT42
G. Bikshapathy, J.1. Both the C.C.C. As. can be disposed of by a common judgment, as they arise out of the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 555 of 1999 on the file of the learned II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dated 24-7-2000.2. Ushodaya Enterprises Limited, a Public Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, having its registered office at Hyderabad filed the suit in O.S. No. 555 of 1999 under Section 26 and Order VII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, Sections 55 and 62 of the Copyright Act, Sections 27, 105 and 106 of The Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, seeking the following reliefs:(a) For a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their servants, agents or anyone claiming through any of them from passing off their Agarbathis business as the business of the plaintiff by using the expression Eenadu or any other expression phonetically and/ or visually similar or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's mark, AND/OR by applying t...
Keshav Prashad Vs. Commissioner and Special Officer, Mch, Hyderabad an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD182; 2001(2)ALT297
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ.1. The only question which arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the constructions raised by the petitioner could have been demolished for the purpose of widening of the road without the consent of the appellant. 2. Before the learned single Judge the respondent herein had relied upon aletter dated 10-8-2000 wherein some authority purported to act on behalf of the Commissioner alleging: 'Sir/Madam, Sub :--MCH: TP: SEC:CIR-V - Road widening from Toliehowki Junction to Darga (MCH Limits) - Affected portion under Road Widening - Regarding. With reference to the above subject, it was discussed in personally and taken over the possession in respect of premises No. 8-1-328 at Toli Chowki, Hyderabad to an extent of area 4279.74 Sq.Mt. and same sketch plan is enclosed. Thank you for the co-operation extended and the MCH will consider your request as per the G.O. Ms. No.483-MA, dated 24-8-1998 for considering in accordance to Rules. Thanking you.' The cont...
Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gollu Somi Naidu a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-2000
Reported in: II(2001)ACC564; 2001(3)ALT190
ORDERN.V. Raman, J.1. This appeal is filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited, aggrieved by the order, dated 6-1-1997 in O.P. No. 11/1996 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vizianagaram.2. When the 1st respondent herein was travelling in a van bearing No. AND 5704 on 1-3-1991, it turned turtle near Gavarammapeta village because of the rash and negligent driving of its driver, the 2nd respondent herein, due to which the 1st respondent sustained injuries all over his body. He, therefore, laid a claim in the above said O.P., for a compensation of Rs. 80,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence on record, found that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the 2nd respondent. It awarded a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- to the 1st respondent with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the petition till the date of deposit, and held that the appellant the 2nd and the 3rd respondents herein were jointly and s...
S. Alam Saheb Vs. A.P. State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd. an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD486; 2001(1)ALT464
ORDER1. The petitioner was employed as Senior Field Assistant with the A.P. State Co-operative Marketing Federation Limited (Markfed) since 1968. While so, in the year 1978, he was working as in-charge, Tobacco purchasing centre at Pattikonda village of Kurnool District, the villagers of Burjula, Byluppala and Hosur appear to have made certain complaints against the petitioner alleging that he has received illegal gratification from them for rendering official favours. Consequently, a preliminary enquiry appears to have been conducted on 8-2-1979, pursuant to which the petitioner was placed under suspension pending enquiry with effect from 9-2-1979. Initially, one Sri M.V. Subba Rao, Accounts Officer of the respondent appears to have been appointed as an Enquiry Officer. Thereafter, on 9-10-1979, the Plant Engineer Y. Eshwar Reddy was appointed as an Enquiry Officer who was substituted with one Sri. K. Narsimhaiah, by the orders of the respondent dated 6-11-1979. Mr. K. Narsimhaiah was...
Pulli Ramaiah and Another Vs. Potta Nagobhushanama and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD525; 2001(2)ALT38
ORDERSatyabrata Sinha, CJ.1. This writ appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1-11-2000, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court, whereby and whereunder, the writ petition being WP No.10048 of 2000, filed by writ petitioners-respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein was disposed of in the manner following;'In the impugned order, the first respondent himself directed the second respondent to take action in accordance with Section 32 of the Act. The only objection of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the various observations made by the first respondent would not leave anything to be decided by the second respondent in the enquiry. Therefore, as directed by the first respondent, the matter shall stand remitted to the second respondent who shall decide the application of respondents 3 and 4 in accordance with law. He shall decide the same without being influenced by the report submitted by the MRO or by any of the observations made by the first respondent in the impugned o...