Andhra Pradesh Court February 2002 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.
Md. Akbar and anr. Vs. State of A.P., Through P.S. Rep., by Its Public ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2002
Reported in: 2002(1)ALT(Cri)572; 2002CriLJ3167
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J. 1. This petition is filed to quash the order-dated 25.6.2001 in Crl.M.P.No.1672 of 2001 in C.C.No.136 of 1997 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate.2. After the closure of the prosecution case and after examination of the accused under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., prosecution filed Crl.M.P.No.1672 of 2001 in C.C.No.136 of 1997 under Sec. 294 Cr.P.C., seeking permission of the Court to receive certified copy of an order of injunction, certified copies of the pahanies and certified copy of the F.I.R. in Cr.No.84 of 1997 said to have been registered subsequent to the registration of the F.I.R. in this case. Petitioners, who are the accused in this case, opposed the said application contending that the documents are not genuine and that those documents ought to have been collected during the course of investigation and that the prosecution is not entitled to fill up the gaps in its case after they are examined under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., The learned Magistrate, rejec...
R. Yadaiah and anr. Vs. Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Ranga R ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD839; 2002(6)ALT288
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Prasanna Kumar, Counsel representing Sri Amarnath Goud, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Chandraiah, the learned Government Pleader for Excise.2. The facts of the case are simple. The writ petition is filed for a writ, order or direction declaring Cr. No. ES/C/8357/98, dated 70-9-2001 and 2-8-2001 of 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary and to set aside the same and direct the respondents to permit the petitioners to carry on the business upto 30-9-2001 and further renew the licence from 1-10-2001 onwards by suspending the operation of Cr. No. ES/C/ 8357/98, dated 7-9-2001 and 2-8-2001 of 1st respondent and pass such other suitable orders.3. The petitioners filed the writ petition mainly aggrieved of the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 2-8-2001 wherein it was stated as follows :--'Hence under the above circumstances by virtue of powers vested in me under Clause b of Sub-section (1) of Section 31 of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968, I, P. Sa...
Rayaprolu Narayana Murthy Vs. Rayaprolu Ramakrishna Sarma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)ALD841; 2003(3)ALT11
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In this second appeal, the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court dated 19-9-1989 in AS No. 66 of 1983 reversing that of the trial Court dated 26-3-1983 in OS No. 504 of 1980 are in challenge. The plaintiff is the appellant. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as arrayed in the suit.2. The plaintiff filed the suit for partition. The plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 are the sons of late Rayaprolu Chalapathi. It was the case of the plaintiff that the 3rd defendant by name Rayaprolu Rama Krishna Sharma was given in adoption to one Rayaprolu China Krishna Murthy. The joint family comprising of the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 owned a house bearing Door No. 10-3-48 in Nageshwara Rao Street, Ramaraopet, Kakinada. According to the appellant, the 3rd defendant was not entitled to any share in the partition since he was given in adoption. The 3rd defendant contested the suit. He disputed the alleged adoption and claimed a share in ...
Bar Association of Bhadrachalam Khammam District. Vs. the Government o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD811a; 2002(2)ALT228
1. Heard.2. The writ petition was filed by the Bar Association of Bhadrachalam, Khammam District seeking for a Mandamus and to declare the action of the Government of Andhra Pradesh in depriving the services of trained Judicial Officers to the people of tribal areas in conducting Mobile Courts, particularly at Bhadrachalam and not giving extension of time for continuation of Mobile Court at Bhadrachalam is violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.3. The writ petition, in our opinion, is not maintainable. The Bar Association has no fundamental right to seek for establishment of a Court in a particular town or city. It is settled law that establishment of Court is a question of public policy and the policy decision is required to be left to the Government and the Members of the Bar are, therefore, would have no locus standi to file writ petition for establishment of a Court in a particular city. The writ petition fails and is dismissed....
Preeti Puranik and ors. Vs. Ntr University of Health Sciences, A.P., V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD409; 2005(3)ALT223
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners seek the relief of declaration that (1) the procedure prescribed in G.O. Ms. No.47, Social Welfare Department, dated 31-5-2000 is not applicable to the selection of candidates for admission against seats in Post-Graduate Medical Courses reserved for Scheduled Castes; (2) admissions to the Post-Graduate Medical Courses are to be made on the basis of merit subject to rule of reservation as provided for in the rules contained in G.O.Ms.No.260 dated 10-7-1997; and (3) Notification dated 29-10-2001 issued by the 1st respondent - University suspending the process of selection of candidates for admission into Post-Graduate Medical Courses against Scheduled Caste seats is illegal and arbitrary.2. Broadly stated, the averments in the affidavit filed by the petitioners are that, the petitioners who belong to Scheduled Caste community have passed MBBS., course in different years; and they appeared for the entrance examination held by...
People for Economical and Effective Medicare (Peem), Hyderabad Vs. Uni ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD471; 2002(2)ALT334
Dr. Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J. 1. Heard Sri A. Satya Prasad, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-Association and learned Additional Advocate-General appearing on behalf of the Government of Andhra Pradesh.2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-People of Economical and Effective Medicare ('PEEM' for short) represented by its Chairman, Dr. P.V.R Bhaskar Rao, Hyderabad for the following reliefs:-'......To issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in nature of writ of mandamus directing Respondent No. 3 not to act upon the agreements entered into with the Dubai Government on 15-1-2001 by declaring the agreement entered into with the Dubai Government as unconstitutional and violative of the executive power available to the State Government under Article 162 of the Constitution of India apart from violative of Articles 10 - 20 of List-I of Schedule VII besides declaring that the State Government has no jurisdiction or authority to enter into a...
Bolla Babu Prasad and ors. Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)ALD40
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the compensation for their lands acquired for laying road from Vatsavai to Cheviticallu of Krishna District, as arbitrary, illegal and against the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay the compensation to the petitioners for their lands acquired respectively in Thalluru village, Vatsavai Mandal, Krishna District and pass such other suitable orders.2. It is stated that the writ petitioners were small marginal farmers and owners of the lands, the details had been furnished in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It is further stated that about twenty years back the respondents had taken possession of these lands for laying the roads from Vatsavai to Cheviticallu of Krishna District and after laying the road, th...
Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors. Vs. V. Sudarsanam and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)ALD236
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In this batch of two writ appeals and 24 writ petitions, a common question arises for consideration. Therefore, they are disposed of by a common judgment.2. All these matters arise under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The subject-matter of all these cases except WA No. 1497 of 1996 is the land admeasuring 145 acres in Sy Nos. 196 and 200 to 207 situated at Kondapur village of Ranga Reddy District. The subject-matterof WA No. 1497 of 1996 is the land admeasuring 25 acres in Sy. Nos. 297/1/1, 297/2/1 and 298/1 Gudi of Malkapur village, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad District.3. The genesis of these proceedings is as under:The original pattedar and owner of land in Sy. Nos. 196 and 200 to 297 of Kondapur village filed declaration under Section 6 of the Act in the year 1981. The declaration was submitted on behalf of the pattedar and other members of the family. It is not evident from the record as to what prom...
Management of Ramakrishna Pharmaceuticals, Hyderabad Vs. State Authori ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)ALD247; 2002(4)ALT678; [2002(95)FLR15]
ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J. 1. WPNo. 29009 of 1995 is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the first respondent in MW No. 13 of 1995 dated 30-11-1995 directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 1,71,844-50 ps. towards the difference in minimum wages payable under G.O. Ms. No. 1833 dated 26-12-1992 and the actual wages being paid by the petitioner management. WP No. 2873 of 2000 is filed by the same petitioner to quash the order in MW No. l of 1997 dated 29-12-1999 directing them to deposit Rs. 12,37,709/- which includes the alleged difference of minimum wages of Rs. 6,18,854.50 ps. and equal amount of compensation.2. The facts in brief are that the second respondent-employees in the petitioner company filed MW Case Nos. 1 of 1997 and 13 of 1995 claiming Rs. 9,56,785/- and Rs. 1,71,844-50 ps. respectively towards payment of difference of wages due to the workmen and the compensation thereof.3. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of Homoeo medicines at its factory i...
V.L. Narasimha Rao Vs. K.T. Pentaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)ALD321; 2002(3)ALT703
Dudagunta Subrahmanyam, J. 1. The defendant in O.S. No. 11 of 1997 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Asifabad filed this revision-petition. The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale deed 2-7-1994 executed by the defendant in the suit. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff wanted to exhibit the said document dated 2-7-1995 as a piece of evidence. The defendant objected for the making of the document taking the contention that the said document is a sale deed and it requires to be stamped as a sale deed and the document is insufficiently stamped, and therefore, inadmissible in evidence. The learned Senior Civil Judge, by his order dated 29-9-1997, held that the document is only an agreement of sale and not sale deed, and therefore, it is not liable for further stamp duty. The document was executed on non-Judicial stamp papers worth Rs. 100/-. Questioning the order of the Senior Civil Judge, this revision-petition is filed by the defendant....
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »