Andhra Pradesh Court February 2000 Judgments

N.A. Radha and Others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(2)ALD560; 2000(2)ALT484

ORDER1. The petitioners, partners of the erstwhile M/s. Vikram Industries, Kakinada, in these proceedings sought a declaration that Section 52-A of A.P. Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 (for short 'the Act') is unconstitutional and that the action of the A.P. State Finance Corporation (R2) seeking to enforce its dues by the notices dated 5-10-1988 and 15-11-1988, against the petitioners under the provisions of the Act, is illegal,2. The facts in brief:(A) M/s. Vikram Industries, Kakinada, a partnership firm was sanctioned a term loan of'Rs.67,000/- in 1971, to meet part of the cost of the land, buildings, plant and machinery and for setting up a unit for manufacture of melamine products. The petitioners are stated to have run the unit fora time but without any payment i.e., towards instalments or interest. (B) Two individuals Jagarlamudi Durga Prasad and Mating Sambasivaram (impleaded as respondents 3 and 4 in the writ petition, but against whom the writ petition was dismissed, for default, ...

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. R. Narayana Reddy and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: I(2001)ACC570; 2001ACJ1920; 2000(6)ALT767

V. Eswaraiah, J.1. United India Insurance Company filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the judgment and decree in O.P. No. 659/92 dated 7-7-1995 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge) Nizamabad. The first respondent is the claimant and owner of the tractor bearing No. ATJ 9249 and Trailer No. ATJ 9251. The second respondent is the owner of the lorry bearing No. MP 04 EO 886. The first respondent filed an application O.P. No. 659/92 before the Tribunal for the damage caused to the tractor on account of accident occurred on 16-6-1992 with the lorry of the second respondent. The Tribunal held that the accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry belonging to the second respondent in which the first respondent sustained injuries and also the tractor was damaged. It appears that the first respondent filed a separate O.P., claiming damages for the personal injuries and certain amounts have been awarded. In addition t...

Mrs. D. Saradha Vs. the Managing Director (Chairman), V.G.P. Wonder La ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

S. Parvatha Rao, President: 1. This is a suo-motu revision taken up in respect of which notice was already directed to the complainant Smt. D. Sarada in CD. No. 13/1998 on the file of the Chittoor District Forum when FA IA No. 1762/1999 preferred by the opposite party therein for condoning the delay in presenting the appeal FA SR No. 3714/1999 came up before us on 30.12.1999. The complainant Smt. D. Saradha received notice but there is no appearance on her behalf and there is no representation also on her behalf. The matter is clearly covered by our order in PCS Industries Ltd. and Anr. v. Y. Meera Reddy, 1999 (2) ALD (CONSUMER) 85, and The Secretary, Thapar Ispat Limited v. A. Savitri, Order dated 14.2.2000 in RP. No. 146/99, following the decision of the National Commission in Rajaram Corn Producers Punjab Ltd. v. Suryakant Nitin Kumar Gupta (HUF) and 4 Ors., I (1996) CPJ 233 (NC), and Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Dunger Chand, I (1995) CPJ 37 (NC). It is obvious tha...

Bina Puri Holdings Bhd, Vijayawada and Another Vs. Government of A.P. ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(3)ALD1; 2000(2)ALT190

1. This writ petition has been filed on behalf of two petitioners. The affidavit in support of the writ petition hasbeen sworn by one Sri S. Vaikuntanathan who is General Manager (Finance and Accounts) in the second petitioner-company. He has filed the affidavit on behalf of both the petitioners and he claims that he is authorised to do so.2. The second respondent issued a notification on 29th July, 1999 inviting prospective bidders to submit the data for the purpose of determining eligibility to participate in tendering process. The first petitioner has submitted the data and he was informed that he is eligible to participate. The bids covered the contract packages of Phase-III of Andhra Pradesh State Highways Projects viz., APSH-8, APSH-9, APSH-10, APSH-11 and APSH-12. He was also informed by a communication that the bidder selected would be entitled to one package. It was also informed that the bid for the packages would be based on criteria of lowest cost to the Government of Andhr...

Medical Council of India, New Delhi Vs. Mamata Educational Society, Kh ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(2)ALD593

ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. MamataEducational Society, Khammam ('Mamata Society' for short), filed Writ Petition No.22675 of 1998 seeking a declaration that the action of the respondent-NTR University of Health Sciences, Andhra Pradesh ('University of Health Sciences' for short), in denying admission of 100 students who have come out successful and secured ranks in the EAMCET, into the first year MDBS course in Mamata Society College for the academic year 1998-99, is illegal and arbitrary.2. The said writ petition was disposed of by the judgment dated 11-11-1998 directing the University of Health Sciences to allot candidates to the college without reference to the letter of the Government of India dated 7-7-1998. It was also directed that as the college has already paid affiliation fees for the academic year 1998-99, the University of Health Sciences shall consider the same and take appropriate action.3. The Medical Council of India, which was not a party to Writ Petition No.22635 of 1998...

C.N. Srinivasan Vs. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, New Delhi and Ot ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(2)ALD490; 2000(2)ALD490; 2000(2)ALT385; 2000(2)ALT385; [2000(85)FLR439]

ORDERR. Ramanujam, J 1. This writ appeal, by the unsuccessful petitioner, is against the order of the learned single Judge dismissing Writ Petition No.13886 of 1999. 2. The writ petitioner (hereinafter referred as 'the appellant'), who is working as Manager, Design Analysis Group of Corporate, R and D Division, Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (for short 'the Company'), filed the above writ petition challenging the order of the 1st respondent in his Officer Order No.23 of 1999 transferring him from Hyderabad to Bhopal and the consequential relief order issued by the 6th respondent on 2-7-1999. 3. The main challenge of the appellant against the impugned transfer order is on the ground of mala fides. The learned single Judge, by the order under appeal, declined to interfere with the same holding that the appellant could not conclusively prove mala fides. 4. The learned Counsel for the appellant, Sri M. V. Durga Prasad, addressed elaborate arguments, contending that: (a) the learned singl...

Channala Ramachandra Rao Vs. State of A.P. and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(2)ALD652; 2000(2)ALT655

ORDER1. Political Justice is a preambular promise of the Constitution of India. 'We, the people of India' shall redeem the promise of 'political justice' is the underlying theme of the Constitution (Seventy Fourth Amendment) Act, 1992. The apprehension of the petitioners in this Batch of cases is that while attempting to achieve political justice, guaranteed right to 'equal protection of laws' another preambular promise is ignored. A deeper curial look is called for. On the eve of elections: to a century and odd urban local bodies-Nagar Panchayats, Municipalities and Municipal Corporations in the State of Andhra Pradesh,all questions raised and all issues involved in these cases are the same and hence are being disposed of by this common judgment, at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the respondents.2. Reservation of seats in Educational Institutions, reservation of civil posts and quasi-Government posts and reservation of seats in l...

Buntupally Pathana Vs. District Collector, East Godavari Dist. and Ano ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(2)ALD773; 2000(2)ALT172

1. The petitioner is an Upa-Sarpanch of Yeleswaram Gram Panchayat in East Godavari District. Assailing the proceedings of the first respondent in Roc.No.596/99-A, dated 3-2-2000, he filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order by holding the same as illegal arbitrary, mala fide, politically influenced and unjustand against the interests of Panchayat at large and for a consequential direction to the first respondent to hold a detailed enquiry on the allegations against the second respondent.2. The averments made in the affidavit accompanying the writ petition are as follows:The second respondent was elected as Sarpanch to the Gram Panchayat of Yeleswaram in the year 1994. Since the beginning of his tenn, the second respondent has been resorting to various financial irregularities, corrupt practices and misuse of powers. Therefore, the petitioner, who is Upa-Sarpanch, elected to the said...

Chittaveni Siddavva and Others Vs. K. Kastoori and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: II(2000)ACC534; 2001ACJ1072; 2000(3)ALD306; 2000(3)ALT286

1. The claimants filed this civil miscellaneous appeal against the order passed in OP No.329 of 1990, dated6-9-1993 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Medak District, at Sangareddy.2. The first appellant is the wife of the deceased-Mallesham and appellants 2 to 4 are the minor children of the deceased. The first respondent is the owner of the offending vehicle; second respondent is the insurer and the third respondent is the APSRTC.3. The brief facts of the case are that on 1-2-1990, while the deceased-Mallesham was travelling in the lorry bearing No. ATL 5361 belonging to the first respondent, met with an accident due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said lorry, which was said to have been dashed against the APSRTC bus bearing No.AEZ 5636, which was coming from the opposite direction. As a result of which, the lorry fell to its left side and the deceased along with several others travelling in the said lorry died and some other persons travelling in the lorr...

Dr. Sunil Kumar Vs. Amolaksingh (Died Per Lrs.)

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(3)ALD657; 2000(3)ALT390

1. The revision petition and the appeal arise out of the order and decree dated 3-3-1988 passed in IA No.514of 1985 in OS No.244 of 1982 and the eventual judgment and decree dated 28-3-1988 passed in OS No.244 of 1982 respectively by the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. As the parties are same and common questions of law and fact are involved in both the proceedings, both can be disposed of together.2. For the sake of convenience and to avoid any confusion, it is expedient to refer the parties as arrayed in the suit. The1st plaintiff filed the suit in OS No.244 of 1982 for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 30-7-1977 and for directing the defendant to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff conveying the property namely the land and building Bearing Municipal No.3-6-364/1 to 364/6 and the land in an extent of 269-1 sq. meters. It is the case of the plaintiff inter alia in theplaint that the defendant is the owner of the property an...