Andhra Pradesh Court November 2002 Judgments

Singareni Collieries Company Limited Vs. Nookala Lingaiah and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD424; 2003(3)ALT647

G. Yethirajulu, J.1. The appellants preferred A.S.Nos. 2489, 2532, 2576, 2756 of 2001 and A.S.Nos.700 and 1273 of 2002 respectively against the judgments of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Peddapalli, Karimnagar District in O.P.Nos. 22, 25, 24 of 1994 and O.P.Nos. 75 and 76 of 1995 respectively, questioning the enhancement of compensation over the amount sanctioned by the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) for the land acquired for Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.2. At the instance of all the claimantsthe LAO referred the matters to the Courtof Senior Civil Judge, Peddapalli underSection 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894('the Act' for brevity). The acquired landsare situated in Janagaon Revenue Village,Ramagundam Municipal Limits, KarimnagarDistrict.A.S. No. 2489 of 2001 3. The LAO of Land Acquisition Unit, Godavarikhani acquired an extent of Ac.42.12 guntas of land situated in S.Nos.58, 60, 68, 72, 250, 251, 254, 86 and 87 of Janagaon Revenue Village for laying road to sand quarry fro...

Prudential Capital Markets Ltd. Vs. Gurram Adinarayana

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

C.P. Suresh, Member: 1. The unsuccessful opposite party is the appellant before this Commission. The facts in brief are that the complainant invested an amount of Rs. 1,35,000/- in Fix Deposit for a period of one year with the opposite party and the opposite party issued certificates to that effect. In spite of approaching the opposite party for refund of Fixed Deposit amount with interest, opposite parties failed to refund the amount. Complainant, therefore, approached the District Forum claiming refund of Fixed Deposit amount of Rs. 1,35,000/- with interest at the rate of 24 per cent per annum and also for costs. Opposite party sent its written version contending that the District Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and the complainant is not a consumer. 2. Basing on these pleadings and the evidence adduced the District Forum held that the complainant is a consumer and the opposite party has committed deficiency in service and directed it to repay Rs. 1,35,000/- with...

Smt. A. Santhi Kumari, I.A.S., Secretary, A.P. Social Welfare Resident ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD460; 2002(6)ALT326; 2003CriLJ1596

B. Sudershan Reddy, J. 1. This Contempt Appeal is directed against the order dated 27-9-2002 made in Contempt Case No. 704 of 2002 by a learned single Judge of this Court. The learned single Judge by the said order dated 27-9-2002 punished the appellant herein with imprisonment to stand up in the Court till the Court raises and to pay Rs. 2,000/- as fine within two weeks and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one week. The said order is challenged on various grounds by the appellant. 2. In order to consider the various submissions made on behalf of the appellant herein challenging the impugned order, it may be necessary to notice certain basic statutory features enshrined in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act'). 3. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been introduced in the statute-book for the purposes of securing a feeling of confidence of the people in general and for due and proper administration of justice. It is a powerful weapon in the hands of the l...

State of A.P. and anr. Vs. Desodharaka Kasinadhuni Nageswara Rao Thota ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD232; 2003(3)ALT770

V.V.S. Rao, J.1. The miscellaneous application filed by the respondent in the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is listed for hearing. Learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned Counsel for the respondent requested this Court to dispose of the main appeal itself finally and hence, arguments were heard. The matter was taken up for final disposal.2. The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the District Collector, Krishna and the Principal, Government Manila Polytechnic College, Nandigama are the appellants. They filed this appeal under Order XLIII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 impugning the order dated27-6-2002 in I.A. No. 223 of 2002 in OS No. 30 of 2002 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Nandigama. By the impugned order, the appellants herein, their men and agents have been restrained from interfering with Item-Ill of plaint schedule property including making any constructions thereon.3. The respondent - Desodharaka Kasinadhuni Nageswar Rao Thota, a Trust...

K. David Vs. A.P. Pollution Control Board and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD483

S.R. Nayak, J.1. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed solely on the ground of delay and laches as rightly opined by the learned single Judge. The appellant is the writ petitioner and he filed the writ petition for the following reliefs:'...the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus- 1. directing the respondents 1 and 2 to accord seniority to the petitioner over respondents 3 to 5 in the category of Superintendent by granting a notional date of promotion taking into account of petitioner's eligibility and 2. consider promoting the petitioner to the next higher categories of Accounts Officer and Administrative Manager; 3. Repatriate respondents 6 and 7 in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 180 Environment, Forest, Energy, Science and Technology Department dated 26.12.1996 and Rule 15 of Rules issued in G.O. Ms. No. 3 dated 1.1.1979 as they are not qualified, and pass such other order or orders.' 2. The facts relevant to...

The Legal Aid Committee, High Court of A.P. Vs. the Director General a ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD(Cri)690; 2003(1)ALT221

ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. On the strength of a letter from Ms. Sheela Barse, a social activist addressed to the Honourable the Chief Justice of India with respect to deplorable conditions in which mentally ill and insane women are locked up and kept in Presidency Jail, Calcutta, a writ petition was registered and certain directions were issued by the Supreme Court of India. For whatever reason, the said Ms. Sheela Barse withdrew from the matter. The Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee was substituted in her place.2. It is not necessary in detail to notice the several orders passed from time to time by the Supreme Court of India. Various Commissioners were appointed to investigate and report on the conditions obtaining in places where women and children were being detained. The Supreme Court has monitored the implementation of its orders over the years.3. On the suggestions made by the learned counsel for the Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee and also some other learned counsel appear...

Thanheri Muni Sankaraiah Vs. Bojjala Raja Reddy

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD66; 2003(1)ALT292

ORDERG. Bikshapathy, J. 1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 22 of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act against the orders passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Srikalahasti in CMA No. 3 of 2002 dated, 16-7-2002 confirming the Order and Decree passed by the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Srikalahasti in RCC No. 1 of 1999, dated 8-2-2002. 2. Petitioner is the tenant. Respondent is the landlord. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to herein according to jural relationship. Landlord filed a petition before the learned Rent Controller in RCC No. 1 of 1999 seeking eviction of the tenant from the premises bearing No. 16-539 situated at Sreeramnagar Colony, Srikalahasti town on the ground of wilful default, bona fide requirement and for effecting necessary repairs. It was the case of the landlord that the tenant committed wilful default of payment of rent from the month of January, 1999 and therefore, he isliable for eviction. It i...

K.L.N. Raju Vs. Pawan and Company and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD241

ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 20-6-2002 in E.P. No. 35/2000 on the file of the III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The petitioner herein isjudgment debtor No. 3, The 1st respondent is the decree holder. Respondents 2 and 3 herein are also the judgment debtor Nos. 1 and 2. By the said impugned order, the trial Court directed to issue attachment of the schedule of movable properties of the petitioner herein against which this Civil Revision Petition is filed.2. The 1st respondent herein filed suit O.S. No. 450/1998 on the file of the III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for recovery of certain amounts. The petitioner herein is the 3rd defendant and respondents 2 and 3 herein are defendants 1 and 2. All of them were set ex parte in the suit on 28-10-1999 and the suit was decreed by the judgment and decree dated 16-6-2000 in O.S. No. 450/1998 by the Court below. A reading of the said judgment di...

M.A. Majeed Vs. Chairman, Dena Bank and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALT99; (2003)ILLJ737AP

ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J.1. This writ petition has been filed seeking writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the order dated 13.12.1990 made in proceedings No. BZO: PER: 4820: 90 issued by the respondents-bank as confirmed in order dated 30.11.1993, and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service by giving all the monetary and attendant service benefits including the seniority. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as an apprentice in respondent-Dena Bank, a nationalised bank and after his appointment he was posted at Hyderabad, at Bank Street Branch. In the year 1978, the petitioner was promoted as an officer in the cadre of Junior Manager Grade-I. By virtue of the said promotion, the petitioner was posted to work at Bank's Branch Office at M.G. Road, Secunderabad. In the year 1981, he was further promot...

Ongole Tobacco Processing and Marketing Co-operative Society Vs. Gover ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD787

ORDERT. Meena Kumari, J. 1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings in G.O. Rt. No. 108, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Agriculture and Co-operation (Co-op.I) Department dated 28-1-1999, as illegal and without jurisdiction and contrary to Rule 52(1) of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1964 (for short the Rules).2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the Guntur District Co-operative Marketing Society Limited, Guntur, i.e., the fourth respondent herein had supplied fertilizers to the petitioner society during the years 1967 to 1970 and a sum of Rs. 40,276.28/- out of the total amount of sale price remained unpaid to the fourth respondent society. The fourth respondent society filed an Arbitration Reference in claim No. 719/71-72 dated 22-7-1971 for Rs. 40,276.28/- against the petitioner, before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Guntur. The Deputy Registrar of ...