Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Koya Ratnam and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALT265
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Respondents 1 to 6 filed O.P.No. 336 of 1988 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Eluru, alleging that on 12-2-1988 at about 8 a.m. mini van bearing No. AEW. 5472 belonging to the 8th respondent, being driven in a rash and negligent manner by the 7th respondent and insured with the appellant, dashed against K. Ramanjaneyulu (the deceased) resulting in his death. Respondents 1 to 4 are the widow and children and respondents 5 and 6 are the parents of the deceased, who was aged about 33 years and was contributing Rs. 24,600/- per year and claimed Rs. 1,00,000/- from respondents 7, 8 and the appellant.2. 8th Respondent filed his counter contending that the van was being driven by K. Sriram Murthy, who has a valid driving licence, but not the 7th respondent at the time of the accident and so the compensation, if any has to be paid by the insurer, i.e., the appellant. The 7th respondent adopted the counter of 8th respondent.3. The appe...
Amita Sales Corporation Vs. Aditya Fibre Glass Products
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD69
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The revision petitioner is the decree holder in EP No.7 of 1999 in OS No. 4914 of 1998 on the file of the IX Junior Civil Judge, City civil Court, Hyderabad. The respondent herein is one Messrs Aditya Fibre Glass Products, represented by its proprietrix Smt. J. Vijayalakshmi. She had filed an application under Section 151 CPC praying the Court to recall the warrant of attachment dated 29-1-1999 and to dismiss the execution petition as a nullity. It is stated that she is the third party and proprietrix of the firm. When the bailiff came from the Court to attach the movables properties she came to know that a suit for recovery of Rs. 19,354/- was filed and an ex parte decree was passed against RSI Fibre Glass Products Private Limited, the defendant in the said suit. It was also averred that she is in no way concerned with the RSI Fibre Glass Products Private Limited and taking advantage of the fact that her address had been shown the decree holder is trying to pr...
Gajanand Agarwal Vs. Sharma Traders Industries (P) Ltd. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD(Cri)811; 2001(2)ALT(Cri)410; [2002]109CompCas909(AP)
Tamada Gopalakrishna, J. 1.This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 29 of 1999 on the file of the Special Judicial I Class.Magistrate, Mobile Court, Vizianagaram. 2. The allegations, according to the complaint, are that the petitioner as well as the 1st respondent are businessmen and, in their business transactions the petitioner issued two cheques bearing Nos. 710222 and 710223 dated 26.10.1996 for Rs. 43,450.56 and Rs. 1,07,000/- respectively. On presentation of the cheques, they were bounced with an endorsement 'Referred to Drawer'. After complying with the formalities as contemplated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the 1st respondent herein filed a complaint which was registered and taken on file as C.C. No. 29 of 1999 on the file of the Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Vizianagaram, for the alleged offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. The present pet...
Dr. G. Venkateshwar Rao Vs. State Rep., by Its Public Prosecutor and a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: I(2002)DMC371
ORDERT. CH. Surya Rao, J.1. The petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings initiated against him under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code before the V Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.835 of 2001.2. The factual matrix germane in the context for consideration may be set forth at the outset thus:3. A private complaint was filed by the de facto complainant alleging inter alia offences punishable under Section 497 and 498 of the Indian Penal Code. That complaint was forwarded to the Police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity 'the Code'). The Police eventually filed the report under Section 173 of the Code recommending for dropping of the proceedings on the premise that the matter was of a civil nature. A protest petition was filed by the de facto complainant after having been served with the referred notice by the Police. The learned Magistrate examined the de facto complainant and recorded his sworn statement. Similarly, he e...
Buddana Nageswara Rao Vs. Yendeevi Sri Anjaneyulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)ALT56
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed by 2nd Judgment-debtor in E.P. No. 26/97 in O.S. No. 67/97 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam.2. The respondent-Decree-holder filed E.P. No. 26/97 in O.S. No. 67/97 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam against two Judgment-debtors, the father and the son, seeking their arrest for realization of the decretal amount. On behalf of the Decree-holder, P.W.1 was examined and on behalf of the Judgment-debtors, they had examined themselves as R.Ws.1 and 2 and Exs.B-1 and B-2 were marked. The Court below had arrived at the conclusion that the Decree-holder is not entitled to seek the arrest of Judgment-debtor No. 1 i. e, the father, but had ordered the arrest and detention of Judgment-debtor No. 2 only and Judgment-debtor No. 2, aggrieved by the said order had filed the present Civil Revision Petition.3. Sri Ram Gopal, learned Counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioner had made elaborate submissions and h...
Tirupathi Roller Flour Mill Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: [2002]126STC11(AP)
ORDERS.R. NAYAK, J.1. The petitioner is running a wheat roller flour mill and is an assessee on the rolls of the Commercial Tax Officer, Mehdipatnam Circle, Hyderabad for the purpose of assessment under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and also the Central Sales Tax Act.2. The petitioner manufactures wheat products like atta, ravva and maida from wheat, which is the raw material. Since wheat is not grown in Andhra Pradesh, the petitioner purchases wheat from Food Corporation of India or from wheat growing States like Punjab, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, etc. Wheat is one of the declared goods under the Act. For the assessment year 1993-94, the assessing officer, namely, the Commercial Tax Officer, second respondent herein issued a show cause notice in G.I. No. 27043/93-94, dated February 28, 1995 to the petitioner herein proposing to complete the assessment as under :Gross turnover ... Rs. 7,92,09,856.19Exempted turnover ... Rs. 2,52...
Director of Settlements, Hyd. and Others Vs. Neerupaka Rama Krishna
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-13-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALD828
V.V.S. Rao, J. 1. This is an application seeking review of the judgment of this Court dated 24-3-1999 in WA No. 435 of 1999. By the said judgment, a Division Bench of this Court upheld the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 18-11-1998 in WP No. 6453 of 1998. Reliance was placed on earlier order of this Court in WP No. 10773of 1996 in which it was directed that the petitioners herein shall issue pattadar pass books to the respondents herein. In these matters, the parties herein will be referred to by their status in WP No. 6453 of 1998, out of which WA No. 435 of 1999 arose.2. The first respondent, namely, Director of Settlements, issued a show-cause notice to the writ petitioner bearing PP.No. 5/98 H2 dated 28-2-1998 to show-cause as to why the patta granted to the petitioner should not be held irregular and liable for cancellation. It is stated in the impugned show-cause notice that the land admeasuring Acs.0.48 in Venkatagiri Village of Venkatagiri Mandal comprising in RS No....
Shaik Shafiullah and Another Vs. Mohammadiya Educational Society, Cudd ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-13-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALD783; 2001(6)ALT26
1. In this revision, the petitioners, who are the plaintiffs, are aggrieved against the proceedings under the docket order dated 27-8-2001 in IA No.740 of 2001 and other applications in OS No.21 of 2001 on the file of the Additional District Judge at Cuddapah.2. Heard Smt. N. Shoba, the teamed Counsel for the petitioners and Sri B. Narayana Reddy, learned Counsel who, on filing of caveat, takes notice on behalf of the respondents.3. The case of the petitioners is that they have filed the present suit for a declaration against the respondents herein that the certificate bearing Registration No.685 of 1999 dated 3-8-1999 issued in favour of the defendant No.1, a society, by the District Registrar (Registration and Stamps) Cuddapah is not valid, opposed to the provisions under the Societies Registration Act and also for permanent injunction restraining the defendants in any way acting with the institution and the properties. Along with the suit, the plaintiffs had filed an application for...
Koneru Venkata Subbaiah Vs. Koneru Venugopal and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-13-2001
Reported in: 2001(6)ALD213; 2002(1)ALT49
ORDER1. These two revision petitions are filed by the 2nd and 1st respondents against the judgment and decretal order of the learned Subordinate Judge in OP No.83 of 1987. As both the revisions are against the same order, they are disposed of by this common order.2. The 1st respondent in both the revisions filed the O.P., under Section 17 ofthe Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') praying the Court to confirm the Award, dated 15-9-1985 passed by the arbitrators; to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to deliver possession of the lime garden and house bearing No. 17/458 and the down portion of D.No.l7/358/B1, and further to direct the 1 st respondent to cause production of the original award and the consent letter and to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- and further to direct the 2nd respondent to pay Rs. 62,000/- to the petitioner as per the award, apart from declaring the 173rd right in Item No.10 of the vacant site bearing D.No. 18/39 situate, in B.Syedsab Street, Cuddapah and to...
Syndicate Bank, Tangutur Branch, Tangutur, Prakasam District Vs. Pamid ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-13-2001
Reported in: 2001(6)ALD365; 2001(6)ALT640; [2002]108CompCas12(AP)
ORDER1. The petitioner/Decree Holder in the execution petition is the petitioner in the present revision petition. The Decree Holder, which is a Nationalised Bank, filed the execution petitioner against the second Judgment Debtor, who is a surety for the recovery of the amount due by the principal Debtor.2. The respondent herein, who was the Judgment Debtor filed a counter stating that he was only a surety and not the original borrower and he is not liable to paythe debt and the Decree Holder must proceed against the secured properties of the first Judgment Debtor. It is also stated that as the suit was abated against the original borrower, the decree passed against the second Judgment Debtor is void, illegal and is not executable. It is also contended that the Government of India cancelled the agricultural debts, to the extent of Rs.10,000/-and as the first Judgment Debtor is an agriculturist and the first Judgment Debtor borrowed the amount for agricultural purpose, the debt is also ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »