Andhra Pradesh Court June 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.
B. Lakshmipathi Vs. Municipal Council, Kamareddy, Rep. by Commissioner
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALT756
G. Rohini, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant in this appeal which is filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 21.10.1992 in A.S.No.1513 of 1989 confirming the judgment and decree dated 14.2.1989 in O.S.No.149 of 1983 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Nizamabad.2. The appellant herein filed O.S.No.149 of 1983 seeking a declaration that he is the owner of the suit schedule property and recovery of possession of the same by evicting the 1st defendant. He also sought a further declaration that the order of the 2nd defendant dated 10.12.1971 allotting an extent of 500 sq. yards out of the suit schedule property to the District Medical and Health Officer is illegal and without jurisdiction.3. The suit schedule property is an extent of Ac.3.05 guntas of vacant land situated in Survey No.173/1 within the limits of Kamareddy Gram Panchayat, Nizamabad district. The 1st defendant in the suit is the Gram Panchayat, Kamareddy and the District Collector, Pancha...
B. Gandhi S/O Suraiah Vs. Government of A.P., Rep. by Its Secretary, C ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT197
ORDERT. Meena Kumari, J.1. The petitioner is a Paid Secretary in Manthena P.A.C.S., Kankipadu Mandal, Krishna District. The petitioner questioned the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the proceedings in P.S.No.138/2002-A2 dated 4.5.2002 proposing to dismiss him from service and also to declare all the proceedings including the issuance of charge Memo dated 3.11.2002 as illegal. 2. When the matter has come up for hearing, both the counsel agreed that the Writ Petition may be disposed of finally at the admission stage. 3. The learned Counsel Sri A. Satya Prasad has argued that the petitioner has been working as Paid Secretary and a surcharge order has been passed on 15.9.1988 fixing liability of Rs.15,849.50 ps. in the proceedings issued by the fourth respondent in Rc.No.4297/87-C dated 15.9.1988. Aggrieved by the issuance of surcharge proceedings, the petitioner has preferred CMA No.1 of 1989 before the Co-operative Tribunal and District Munsif at Nuzvid. The Co-operative Tribunal...
Dr. Syed Afzal Vs. Syed Hamza and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALT175; 2002(2)LS330
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. The second plaintiff in O.S.No.123 of 1997, on the file of the Court of the II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, filed this Revision aggrieved by the rejection of his application to reopen the evidence of the plaintiffs.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:O.S.No.123 of 1997 has been initially filed by the 1st respondent herein for administration of the estate of his late father 'Syed Aziz'. The revision petitioner was originally arrayed as defendant No.8 in the suit. Later by order dated 22.9.1998 in I.A.No.1192 of 1998 he was transposed as 2nd plaintiff. After the issues were settled, the revision petitioner-Plaintiff No.2 was examined on 25.1.2000 as P.W.1. Another witness was examined as P.W.2, and thereafter, evidence of the plaintiffs was closed on 28.3.2000. Evidence on behalf of the defendants was commenced on 3.8.2000 and cross-examination of D.W.1 was completed on 17.8.2000. At that stage, the revision petitioner, who is the se...
Bio Chemicals and Synthetic Products Limited, Kukat Pally, R.R. Distri ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD806; 2002(4)ALT446
AR. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard both sides.2. In accordance with the observations of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 1317 of 1986, the appellant filed an application on 23-2-1987 and subsequently on 11-6-1990 under Section 20(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', seeking exemption on the ground that the land is of industrial value and hence, it may be exempted from the provisions of the Act. On the said application, the first respondent called for a report from the second respondent and the third respondent has inspected the land on 18.3.1992. According to the appellant-petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 have submitted recommendations in favour of the application for exemption filed by the appellant. However, the first respondent vide Memo dated: 9-3-2002 has rejected the application of the appellant for grant of exemption from the provisions of the Act. It is submitted by Sri Vedula Venkataramana, the learned Counsel for the appellant t...
Akkam Laxmi Vs. Thosha Bhoomaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD808; 2002(5)ALT624
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The revision petitioner assails the order dated 1-8-2001 passed by the learned Junior Civil Judge, Medak, in OS No. 8 of 1998.2. When a xerox copy of the agreement of sale dated 24-4-1997 was sought to be introduced in evidence by the plaintiff, while leading secondary evidence through PW4 on an objection taken by the adversary under the impugned order the learned Judge directed the document to be impounded under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act ('the Act' for brevity) on the premise that the document should be stamped as if it were a sale inasmuch as the possession was delivered under the document in view of Article 47-A of Schedule I-A of the said Act. Earlier, it appears, in IA No. 40 of 2001 the plaintiff-revision petitioner was permitted to lead secondary evidence by producing xerox copy of the original agreement of sale dated 24-4-1997. It is discernible from the order that the original agreement itself was executed on a plain paper and since it was ...
Manasa Trust Vs. Nadimpilli Satyanarayana Raju and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD707; 2002(4)ALT329
S.R. Nayak, J. 1. This writ appeal is filed by the Sri Manasa Trust, Vijayanagaram being aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge dated 28-1-1997 made in W.P. No. 8506 of 1995.2. The above writ petition was filed by the 1st respondent herein praying for a mandamus restraining the appellant herein and the Commissioner of Endowments from dispossessing him from the schedule lands except by due course of law as provided in the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956 (for short 'Tenancy Act') and for a consequential direction to the appellant herein not to hold any auction of the lease hold rights of the petition schedule lands.3. The learned single Judge placing reliance on the judgments of this Court in A. Hanuma Ready and Ors. v. Pushpagiri Mutt, 1970 APHCN 30 (DB), Sanadhi Narayana v. State of A.P., 1990 (1) ALT 237 (DB), Rimmalapudi Ramachandra Rao Chowdury v. Sri Venugopalaswamywari Temple (W.P. No. 15925/88 dated 24-9-1996) and Nalli Sanyasi Naidu and Anr. v. Maharaj...
B. Venkateswarlu and anr. Vs. District Collector, Hyderabad District, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD730; 2002(6)ALT153
T. Meena Kumari, J. 1. As the subject-matter in all the writ petitions is one and the same, these writ petitions are disposed of by a common order. 2. At the time of hearing the vacate stay petitions, both the counsel agree that the writ petitions themselves may be disposed of finally. 3. The present writ petitions have been filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the impugned Memo Nos. 12/2191/01; 12/ 2192/2001; 12/2190/01 and 12/2186/01 dated 19-11-2001 of the respondent, i.e., the District Collector, Hyderabad in refusing to issue No Objection Certificate in respect of plot admeasuring 500,500,1050 and 500 square yards respectively in Premises No. 8-2-693, Banjara Hills. Hyderabad i.e., correlating to TS Nos. 19/2 and 20/part/ corresponding to the defunct Jubilee Hills Municipality Plot No. 129/45/D situated at Road No. 12, Banjara Hills. Hyderabad as illegal, improper and unconstitutional, and consequently direct the respondents to issue 'No Objection Certificates' in pursuance...
Gudipalli Siddartha Reddy @ Siddu Vs. State of A.P., Rep. by Cbi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD(Cri)1; 2002(2)ALT(Cri)156
ORDERGopalakrishna Tamada, J. 1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in Cr.No.144 of 2002 of Panjagutta P.S. (popularly known as 'Pratyusha murder case') registered for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 309 I.P.C. or alternatively 306 I.P.C. 2. The gist of the case against the petitioner according to the remand report is that he and Pratyusha (hereinafter called 'the deceased') were in love with each other for the past six years. Though it is acceptable to the mother of the deceased, the mother of the petitioner did not agree for the alliance on account of which, both of them decided to commit suicide and in execution of the same, on 23-2-2002 both of them went in a car, purchased one pesticide bottle, mixed the same in Coke and consumed it. Soon after consuming the said pesticide, wisdom prevailed over them; they suddenly changed their attitude and thought that they should not die. Immediately thereafter, both of them went to 'Care Hospital', Hyderabad, in ...
Krishna Oberoi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD318; [2002]257ITR105(AP)
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The petitioner, Krishna Oberoi, which is a division of Novopan Industries Limited is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, with its registered office at Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. The writ petition was filed initially seeking mandamus declaring that the charges paid/payable to the petitioner company by its customers on account of room charges are not in the nature of rent within the meaning of Section 194-1 of the Income Tax Act. Later, that prayer was amended by filing WPMP No. 13783 of 1996 and that WPMP was ordered by this Court on 7-10-1996. The amended prayer reads as follows:'In the facts and circumstances stated above this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ order or order or direction declaring that the charges paid/payable to the 1st petitioner's company by its customers on account of room charges are not in the nature of rent and thus outside the scope of Section 194-1 of the Income Tax Act, consequently issue a writ ...
Khaja Syed Shah Baba Abdul Hissaini Shaharawardhi Sadar Sajjada Nashee ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD341
Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J. 1. This is an appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 18.5.1994 in A.S.No.44 of 1988 on the file of Additional District Judge, Hindupur, confirming the decree and judgment dated 31.10.1988 in O.S.No.67 of 1986 (O.S.No.100 of 1983 on the file of District Munsif, Penukonda) on the file of Subordinate Judge, Penukonda. 2. Necessary facts for the disposal of this second appeal are as follows: There is a Dargah of Saint Syed Shah Baba Fakruddin at Penukonda in Anantapur District. On the day of annual Urs every year, Sandal ceremony will be performed in the said Dargah. The first appellant filed the suit O.S.No.67 of 1986 seeking declaration that the first defendant is entitled to perform the ceremony called as Chinna Gandham Ceremony between 11.00 p.m., and 12.00 midnight only at the time of annual Urs in the Dargah every year and consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men and agents from conducting Chinna Gandham ceremony ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »