Andhra Pradesh Court January 2001 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.
Adapaka Eswaramma and Others Vs. N. Chandra Sekhar
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2001
Reported in: 2002ACJ1544; 2001(2)ALD234; 2001(2)ALT89
ORDER1. This appeal is filed by the claimants, who are the wife and children of one Adapaka Shyam Sundara Rao who died in a road accident on 4-11-1987 at Jagadamba Junction, Visakhapatnam. The claimants filed OP 139 of 1989, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for compensation of rupees one lakh.2. The brief facts of the case are that one Adapaka Shyam Sundara Rao, aged 41 years, husband of first appellant and father of appellants 2 to 4 was coming to Jagadamba Junction, Visakhapatnam, at about 6 p.m. on 4-11-1987, to the city bus stop situate opposite to Daspalla Hotel, to board a city bus. The respondent, N. Chandra Sekhar, suddenly dashed Shyamsundara Rao with his scooter from his behind due to which Shyam Sundara Rao fell down. The respondent immediately removed him to the King George Hospital, Visakhapatnam and left him there in the varandah of the hospital. Shyam Sundara Rao sustained fracture to his lef...
New India Assurance Company Limited, Hyderabad Vs. Bollam Laxmi, @ Lac ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC272; 2001(3)ALD353; 2001(3)ALT402
ORDER1. The Insurance Company filed these appeals and revisions against the orders and decrees passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karimnagar, in OP No.522 of 1996 etc. Since all these matters arise out of a single motor accident, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common order. The respondents in these appeals are the injured/claimants.2. The brief facts: On 24-12-1995, the respondents/claimants in all these cases were proceeding on a tractor-trailer bearing No. AP 15-T-4219-4220 from Manakondur village to Alugnoor village for replantation of paddy seedlings in the land of one Salla Kistaiah, When the tractor and trailerreached near Kurmagundlu village at about10.30 a.m., a lorry bearing No.AP-T-8816came in the opposite direction in a rash andnegligent manner at a high speed and dashedagainst the trailer of the tractor, due towhich the trailer turned turtle and allthe claimants fell down and sustainedinjuries. All the injured were shifted tothe Government...
Valluru Hemalatha Vs. Settipalli Panduranga Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALT414
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. As the issues raised in these two appeals are inter-related, these appeals are being disposed of by this common order.2. Respondent No. 1 in these two appeals who is the father of the second respondent has instituted the suit, O.S.No. 295 of 2000 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada for a declaration that the registered sale deed executed by himself and his son (2nd respondent herein) on 10-7-2000 in favour of the appellant in these appeals to sell the suit property bearing No. 48-9-5, Vishnunagar, Gunadala village of Vijayawada, is void and vitiated by fraud and misrepresentation and also for a consequential injunction restraining the third respondent herein from approving the lay out plan submitted by the appellant. Along with the suit the first respondent has also filed two interlocutory applications under Order 39 Rules 1, 2, 7 and Sections 94 and 151 of CPC, one in I.A. No. 704 of 2000 seeking to restrain the respondents/ defendants 1 to 5 t...
V. Srinivas Vs. Superintendent of Police, Medak Dist., Sangareddy, Med ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD44; 2001(2)ALT1
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ.1. The only contention raised in this writ petition is that the petitioner having been acquitted in the criminal charges, could not have been punished in thedepartmental proceedings and, in any event, having regard to the judgment passed by the criminal Court, the quantum of punishment must be held to be disproportionate to the charges of misconduct levelled against him.2. There is no dispute that the petitioner was proceeded against simultaneously both in the criminal trial as also in the departmental proceedings. In the departmental proceedings; except refusing to cross-examine one witness on the ground that his defence would be disclosed, the petitioner took part in the departmental proceedings without any demur whatsoever and cross-examined all other witnesses. He has not sought even for stay of the departmental proceedings on the ground that he would be prejudiced in the criminal trial if he is supposed to take part in the departmental proceedings.3. The questi...
P. Thulasirama Raju Vs. Regional Manager, Apsrtc, Tirupathi, Chittoor ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD259
ORDER1. The petitioner is a driver in the APSRTC. On allegations of negligent performance of duties, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner in the year 1993 and by the orders dated 27-4-1994 of the 3rd respondent a penalty of removal was inflicted on the petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the second respondent which authority by the orders dated 29-8-1994 confirmed the primary orders. The petitioner preferred a review to the first respondent against the primary and appellate orders above and by the orders dated 6-11-1996, the first respondent on the basis of the remarks in the log sheet found that the accident had occurred due to failure of the brakes, that the driver has not applied his mind to avert the ghastly accident but that in view of his past experience and record, the benefit of doubt is given to the driver petitioner. Accordingly by the subsequent orders dated 6-11-1996 the extreme penalty of removal was substituted by the order ofreinst...
Tasheem Sultana and Others Vs. Andhra Pradesh Advocates Welfare Fund C ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD266; 2001(2)ALT419
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed to issue a writ or direction quashing the proceedings of the respondent in Roc No.APWF/419/92 dated 2-12-1992 and for a consequential direction to grant the death benefits of late Sri Shaik Mahaboob, Advocate, Guntur entitled under the Andhra Pradesh Advocates Welfare Fund Act, 1987 to the petitioners with interest from June, 1989 and costs.2. The first petitioner is the daughter, second petitioner is the son and the third petitioner is the wife of the deceased Shaik Mahboob, Advocate.3. It is stated that late Shaik Mahaboob practiced as an Advocate at Guntur and he was the member of Guntur Bar Association. He died on 8-2-1990. Before his death, he paid the admission fee and also the subscription in June, 1989 for enrolment as member under the provisions of A.P. Advocates Welfare Fund Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act') and he submitted the necessary application in his behalf as prescribed by the Bar Council.4. It is stated that the first petitioner bein...
K. Butchi Reddy and Others Vs. Central Administration Tribunal, Hyd. a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD241; 2001(2)ALD241; 2001(2)ALT166; 2001(2)ALT166; [2001(89)FLR972]
ORDERS.B. SINHA, CJ 1. This writ petition is directed against a judgment dated 16-6-2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in OS No.261 of 1999 whereby and whereunder the petitioners' application was dismissed. Bereft of all the unnecessary details, the basic fact of the matter is as follows:2. A notification purported to be under Section 10(1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (the Act, for brevity) was issued on or about 9-12-1976, which is to the following effect:'In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition Act, 1970 (37 of 1970), the Central Government after consultation with the Central Advisory Contract Labour Board, hereby prohibits employment of contract labour on and from the 1st March, 1977, for sweeping, cleaning, dusting and watching of buildings owned or occupied byestablishments in respect of which the appropriate Government under the Act is the Central Governme...
Moosala Ramarao and Another Vs. District Collector, Srikakulam and Oth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2001
Reported in: 2002ACJ1085; 2001(2)ALD1; 2001(1)ALT656
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the respondents and at their request the matter is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.2. It is stated that the petitioners' father late Thavudu S/o. Asiri Naidu died on 5-10-1995 due to hit by unknown motor vehicle at Laveru (Mandal) near Rambhadrapuram National High Way No.5 at. about 18-45 hours. The petitioners submitted an application on 15-10-1996 before the District Collector, Srikakulam claiming compensation under the Solatium Scheme 1989, framed by the Central Government in purported exercise of power under sub-section (1) of Section 163 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The office of the Collector immediately addressed a letter to the Mandal Revenue Officer, Laveru on 17-10-1996 stating that Forms I, II and V and copies of FIR, inquest and post mortem reports were received and directing to send the proposals to the Revenue Divisional Officer...
Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirupathi, Chittor District Vs. T.C. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD63; 2001(1)ALT715
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ. 1. This appeal is directed against a judgment dated 27-4-1998 passed by a learned single Judge in WP No.13993 of 1993 whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the first respondent herein was allowed. The writ petitioner-respondent in his petition sought for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the appellant herein in not appointing him as Jewellery Appraiser as arbitrary and illegal and for a consequential direction to the appellant herein to appoint him as Jewellery Appraiser with effect from 9-4-1993 with all consequential benefits after setting aside the order of appointment of the 2nd respondent herein as Jewellery Appraiser on 9-4-1993 as arbitrary and illegal. 2. Having regard to the question of law which arises for consideration in this writ appeal, it is not necessary to state the facts of the matter in great details. Suffice it to point out that the writ petitioner had at all material times was working under the appellant herein as Yoga Admi...
Mohd. HussaIn Vs. Apsrtc, Hyderabad and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD78
ORDERSatyabrata Sinha, CJ.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19th August, 1998 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in WP No.3848 of 1998, whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the appellant herein was dismissed. 2. Bereft of all unnecessary details, the fact of the matter is as follows: The appellant, at all material times, was holding the post of Foreman (Mechanical). It is not in dispute that for the purpose of promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) the said post is a feeder post. 3. In the years 1992, 1993, 1996 and 1997, the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) fell vacant. The petitioner contended that although he was senior, his case for promotion was ignored treating the said post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) as a 'selection post'. According to the petitioner, having regard to the fact that his case had not been considered in the earlier years, he is entitled to be promoted to the post of Depot Manager. 4. The ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »