Andhra Pradesh Court December 2002 Judgments

Hotel Flora Vs. Employees State Insurance Corporation

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(6)ALD494

G. Yethirajulu, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the Order dated 30-12-1996 of the Employees State Insurance Court, Hyderabad in E.I. Case No. 13 of 1995 directing to bring the appellant-Hotel within the purview of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act').2. The facts leading to the direction of the Employees State Insurance Court are briefly as follows;3. The appellant is a Hotel situated at A.C. Guards, Hyderabad wherein tea and readymade snacks procured from outside are sold. The appellant engaged 5 or 6 persons only per day. The said workers are not engaged regularly. There is no relationship of master and servant between the appellant and the workers. Except the Supervisor, there is no worker appointed on regular basis. The appellant is not using any power in the manufacturing process. The Insurance Inspector visited the Hotel on 14-3-1991 and found 7 workers only. The Insurance Inspector again visited the Hotel on 5-10-1994 in the absence of the Propriet...

Hotel Flora Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corporation

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2004(1)ALT85; (2004)ILLJ447AP

G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Order dated December 30, 1996 of the Employees' Insurance Court, Hyderabad in E.I. Case No. 13 of 1995 directing to bring the appellant-Hotel within the purview of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act').2. The facts leading to the direction of the Employees' Insurance Court are briefly as follows:3. The appellant is a Hotel situated at A. C. Guards, Hyderabad wherein tea and ready-made snacks procured from outside are sold. The appellant engaged 5 or 6 persons only per day. The said workers are not engaged regularly. There is no relationship of master and servant between the appellant and the workers. Except the Supervisor, there is no worker appointed on regular basis. The appellant is not using any power in the manufacturing process. The Insurance Inspector visited the Hotel on March 14, 1991 and found 7 workers only. The Insurance Inspector again visited the Hotel on October 5, 1994 in the absence of th...

Kunchala Subrahmanyam Vs. the State of A.P., Rep. by Its P.P., High Co ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD(Cri)287; 2003(1)ALT(Cri)156

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri K.G. Krishna Murthy and Smt. K. Sesharajyam, learned Public Prosecutor.2. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, hereinafter referred to as 'Code' for the purpose of convenience, to quash the proceedings in Crl.M.P. No. 89/2002 in S.C. No. 1045/2000on the file of Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Tenali, dated 11-10-2002 and direct the learned Principal Assistant sessions Judge, Tenali to recall PW-1 to PW-3 to cross-examine them in the interest of justice and pass such other appropriate orders.3. The facts in brief are as follows:The petitioner is Accused No. 2 in S.C. No. 1045/2000 on the file of Principal Assistant sessions Judge, Tenali and there were three accused including the petitioner. During the pendency of trial, A-1 died and the petitioner and A-3 are facing the trial for the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. It was also stated that the prosecution examined PW-1 to PW-3 in the month of A...

K. Venkataramudu Vs. the State of A.P., Rep. by Its P.P., High Court o ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALT(Cri)139

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Hemendernath Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor Smt. K. Sesharajyam.2. This Criminal Petition is filed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 12 of 2002 of Puttaparthy Rural Police Station, Anantapur District.3. The petitioner is Accused No. 24 in Cr. No. 12/2002 of Puttapurthi Rural Police Station and it is stated that he is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 147, 148, 323, 452, 427, 436, 353, 506, 341 r/w. section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution is that on 31-5-2002, one C. Venugopal, who is a Police Constable of Puttaparthi Rural Police Station had lodged a complaint with the Sub-Inspector of Police stating that on 31-5-2002 at about 5 p.m., one Sudhakar and his wife, who are the residents of Mamillapalli Cross came to the Police Station and gave a report that on the same day at about 3 p.m. when she was ...

M.A. Ghani Vs. P. Rami Reddy

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD801; 2003(3)ALT120

C.Y. Somayajulu, J. 1. Respondent, who isthe landlord of the plaint schedule property, filed OS No. 3853 of 1987 on the file of the Court of V Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, seeking eviction of the appellant from the plaint schedule property after giving notice to quit under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act. Appellant filed a written statement, inter alia, contending that the notice to quit is not valid. The Trial Court, accepting the contention of theappellant that there is no proper notice to quit, dismissed the suit. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent preferred AS No. 147 of 1989. The learned I Additional Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases-cum-Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, who heard the appeal had by the judgment under appeal, allowed the same and directed eviction of the appellant from the plaint schedule property. Hence this second appeal by the defendant in the suit.2. The only point for consideration in this appeal is whether there is v...

Udarapu Chandrasekhar and ors. Vs. the State of A.P., Rep. by Its P.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD(Cri)301; 2003(1)ALT(Cri)549

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel representing Sri C. Praveen Kumar and also the learned Public Prosecutor Smt. K. Sesharajyam.2. The Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, hereinafter referred to as 'Code' in short for the purpose of convenience. The facts in brief are as follows:The petitioners are accused in C.C. No. 101/2001 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Achampet, Mahaboobnagar District. It is stated that the Circle Inspector of Police, Achampet filed charge sheet against the petitioners under Sections 379 and 406 I.P.C. It is stated that M/s. Patel Engineering Company Limited entered into contract with Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board for its civil works at Srisailam Left Bank Hydro Electric Scheme Project at Srisailam Dam West and the Company undertook the work of excavation of tunnels. For the purpose of excavation, the Electricity Department will supply struct...

A. Bhaskar and ors. Vs. State of A.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD(Cri)411; 2003(2)ALT125

ORDERB. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. This is an application filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to quash the judgments of both the Courts below, passed in S.T.C.No. 27 of 1995 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Dharmavaram and in Crl. Appeal No. 46 of 1997, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Ananthapur to the extent of confiscation of seized amounts.2. The petitioners, accordingly, prayed for a consequential direction to the respondent to refund the amounts seized from their possession to secure the ends of justice.3. Before adverting to the question as to whether the impugned orders suffer from legal infirmity and as to whether the petitioners are entitled for refund of the amount as prayed for, it may be necessary to briefly notice relevant facts leading to filing of this petition.4. The respondent-State challaned the petitioners and A-4 Hussain Peera (since died) before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Dharmavaram, for...

Kantheti Lakshmi Vs. General Manager, Icici Ltd.

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Dr. (Mrs.) Mamata Lakshmanna, Member: 1. This appeal has been filed by the un-successful complainant in C.D. No. 25/1996 on the file of District Forum, Krishna at Machilipatnam. 2. The complainant, a resident of Machilipatnam, purchased five shares of the opposite party from the secondary market through a sub-broker and sent the share certificates alongwith transfer deed with necessary stamps on 8.6.1994 to the opposite party for effecting transfer. The opposite party though received them did not effect transfer of the shares and sent a letter dated 3.2.1995 seeking certain clarification. The complainant sent a letter of Mr. A.V.V. Satyanarayana, dated 30.11.1992, who sold the certificates to the complainant. However, after that there was no response from the opposite party nor the shares were transferred, hence the complaint. 3. The opposite party in its counter denied the allegations made in the complaint. They contended that the complainant was not a consumer as the transfer of the ...

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Annadasu Sambrajyam

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Dr. (Mrs.) Mamata Lakshmanna, Member: 1. Though the appeal was posted for orders on 25.11.2002 Counsel of the appellant was not present. Hence it was posted for dismissal on 3.12.2002. As the Counsel was not present on that day also the appeal was reserved for orders. 2. This appeal is filed by the opposite party in O.P. No. 442/1997, District Forum, Guntur. The complainant is a handicapped girl. She got telephone booth sanctioned by the Telephone Department which was located next to Sri Durga Medical and Fancy Stores, Cherukupalli. The Telephone Booth consisted of a receiver, phone and computer. Those being costly items they were insured with the opposite party on 8.7.1997 vide policy bearing No. 550507/44/97/60/00024. The validity of the policy is from 8.7.1997 to 7.7.1998 and the only premium paid was Rs. 590/-. The risk covered under the policy was Rs. 28,000/- . As the Telephone Booth was located in the Varanda of the medical shop with the approval of the respondent Insurance Comp...

Nellur Thimma Reddy and ors. Vs. Special Deputy Collector, (Land Acqui ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD585; 2003(3)ALT663

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The entire village of Pothapi of Nandalur Mandal, Cuddapah District, was affected by submergence in Somasilla Project. The village was divided into 11 Reaches and proceedings were initiated for acquisition of lands as well as the structures thereon. The lands of the petitioners are in Reaches 4, 5, 8 and 9. Notifications under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act') were issued and Award was passed in the year 1999 fixing the compensation for the lands as well as the structures belonging to the petitioners.2. The petitioners complain that though the Award was passed in the year 1999, the compensation as determined therein was not paid. The petitioners were served with separate endorsements dated 5-8-2002 to the effect that the payment of compensation for their lands cannot be made for the reasons that as per the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in : [1961]1SCR128 and the judgment of the Himachal Pradesh High Cou...