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.K. Office Needs Private Limited Vs. Divya Shakthi Granites Limited, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD646; I(2003)BC304
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. These two Civil Revision Petitions arising out of a common order in two interlocutory applications in O.S.No.647 of 1996 on the file of the Court of the V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad are heard together and decided by this common order:2. The defendant, who is the petitioner in the said two Interlocutory applications, is the Petitioner in both the Revision Petitions. For the sake of convenience the parties shall be referred as they were arrayed in the suit.3. The facts which are not in dispute are as follows;The plaintiff who is the respondent herein filed OS No.674 of 1996 as a summary suit for recovery of Rs.18,46,813.36 Ps alleged to be due from the defendant. The defendant filed I.A.No.1139 of 1996 seekingleave to defend the suit. The said application was allowed by order dated 4-11-1997 subject to the condition of depositing Rs.6,80,741.42 Ps within six weeks. Aggrieved by the said order the defendant filed CRP No.349 of 1998 but the same wa...
Jagadish Vaishnav Vs. Farpos Leading Cateror and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD72; 2002(4)ALT718
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J. 1. This civil revision petition filed under Section 115 of CPC is directed against the order dated 10-3-1997 made in SR No. 327 of 1997 in OS No. 34 of 1996 and OS No. 232 of 1995 on the file of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Rajahmundry.2. Before adverting to the question as to whether the impugned order suffers from any jurisdictional error or any infirmity, it is necessary to briefly notice the relevant facts leading to filing of this civil revision petition.3. The petitioner is the decree holder in OS No. 227 of 1995. The suit is decreed on 25-1-1996. He filed E.P. No. 65 of 1996 on 20-6-1996 for attachment of the monies of the judgment-debtor which are lying with the garnishee. The second respondent in this CRP is the decree holder in OS No. 234 of 1995 and whereas the third respondent is the decree holder in OS No. 34 of 1996. The judgment-debtor in all the suits is the same.4. There is no dispute whatsoever that all the four decree holders ...
Andhra Bank Vs. Challa Subba Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD150; 2003(2)ALT66; I(2003)BC291
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The second appeal is filed by the Andhra Bank, Proddatur, questioning the judgments and decrees of the Courts below to the limited extent of scaling down the interest on the ground that the respondent-defendant is an agriculturist and hence entitled to the benefits of Act IV of 1938.2. The appellant-plaintiff bank had filed a suit against the respondent-defendant for recovery of Rs. 3,226-06 paise being the principal and interest due on a demand promissory note dated 4-10-1974 executed by the respondent-defendant in favour of the appellant-plaintiff bank for Rs. 2,000/-with a minimum interest of 17% per annum with quarterly rests and for costs and since the respondent-defendant deposited title deeds also in respect of the plaint schedule property, a mortgage decree was prayed for. The appellant-plaintiff is a banking institution with its registered office at Hyderabad having branches all over India and O.S.No. 295 of 1981 on the file of the Principal District Munsif...
Vakati Prabhakar Reddy Vs. Tenali Mohan Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-14-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT76
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The fourth defendant in O.S.No. 87 of 1990 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Nellore is the appellant in this Letters Patent Appeal. The respondent-plaintiff filed the said suit against the appellant who is the fourth defendant and three others including the State of A.P. as defendants 1 to 3 for recovery of Rs. 1,98,774/-. The appellant herein having entered his appearance through his Advocate failed to file his written statement. The appellant was accordingly set ex parte by the trial Court on 3-12-1990. Thereafter he filed I.A.No. 59 of 1991 purported to be under Rule 7 of Order IX C.P.C. to set aside the ex parte order against him. The learned trial Judge allowed the said application and the order setting him ex parte was set aside. Thereafter the matter under went several adjournments in order to enable the appellant herein to file his written statement. The appellant herein did not file his written statement till 13-12-1991 and did not e...
Thota Kistaiah Vs. Nikode Bheemera
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALT745
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The unsuccessful defendant in both the Courts is the appellant herein. The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title relating to the plaint schedule property admeasuring Ac.11.78 cents in Sy.No. 102 of Khairgaon village and for other consequential reliefs. The respondent-plaintiff filed O.S.No. 14 of 1982 on the file of the District Munsif, Asifabad for the reliefs referred to supra on the ground that the respondent-plaintiff is the owner and has been in possession of the said property and being in possession of the said property for more than 12 years, the respondent-plaintiff also had perfected his title by adverse possession and in view of the threats posed by the appellant-defendant to take possession of the property, the said suit was instituted. The appellant-defendant had taken a specific stand that he has been in possession and enjoyment of the entire extent of the land in Sy.No. 102 measuring Ac.17.13 cents and, in fact, he never threatened...
S. Erakka Vs. K. Abdul Rehman
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(6)ALT318
P.S. Narayana, J.1. In both these second appeals, though the appellants are different, the respondent is common and since the facts involved in both the matters also are almost similar, both these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment. S.A.No.443 of 1991 was filed by the unsuccessful plaintiff who had no doubt succeeded in the Court of first instance but had suffered a reversing judgment in A.S.No.59 of 1984 on the file of the District Judge, Ananthapur reversing the judgment in O.S.No.745 of 1978 on the file of Principal District Munsif, Ananthapur. Likewise, S.A.No.463 of 1991 was filed against the reversing judgment made in A.S.No.60 of 1984 on the file of the District Judge, Ananthapur reversing the judgment of the Court of first instance in O.S.No.746 of 1978 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Ananthapur.2. The appellants in both these appeals who are the plaintiffs in respect of the suits specified above had filed the respective suits for confirmation o...
S. Syam Prasada Rao Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD651; 2002(4)ALT285
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J. 1. The petitioner in this writ petition is one Mr. S. Syam Prasada Rao, who has been working as Sub-Inspector of Police attached to District Crime Records Bureau, Kurnool. He has filed this writ petition as a public interest litigation impleading the Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and the Inspector-General of Police, Law and Order, Rayalaseema Region, Hyderabad, as respondents. The prayer in the writ petition reads as follows:'.....to issue a writ, order or directionmore particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the 1st respondenti.e., Government in not locating the Office of the Inspector-General of Police, Law and Order, Rayalaseema Region in any suitable point of Rayalaseema as illegal and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and further consequently prayed that this Hon'ble C...
Deccan Tourism Corporation and anr. Vs. Sri Tirumala Tirupathi Devasth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD781; 2002(4)ALT626
AR. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard Sri M.R.K. Choudhary, the learned senior Counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri M. Adinarayana Raju, the learned Standing Counsel for Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam appearing for the 1st respondent.2. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 19-12-2001 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court dismissing Writ Petition No. 25489 of 2001 on the ground that the facility of issuance of tickets in advance for Archananthara Darshan/ Nijapada Seva Darshan is within the domain of the temple administration and this Court cannot substitute its own opinion with that of the decision taken by the temple administration in matters of this nature.3. Writ Petition No. 25489 of 2001 was filed by Deccan Tourism Corporation, a partnership firm and B.S. Narayana Murthy, a pilgrim of the schedule package tour organised by Deccan Tourism Corporation, seeking for the following relief;'........to issue a writ, order or direction morein the nature of mandamus d...
Shaik MohiuddIn Sohail and ors. Vs. Government of A.P. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD728; 2002(4)ALT278
Dr. Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. The petitioners are practising advocates. They filed the writ petition with the following prayer:'.....to issue a writ of mandamus or anyother appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioners for selection and appointment to the post of Junior Civil Judge pursuant to the Notification issued by the 2nd respondent dated 29-1-2002 as illegal, arbitrary etc., if necessary by holding that the insistence of having three years of minimum practice in any Court of Civil or criminal jurisdiction in India for not less than three years for appointment by direct recruitment as provided under Rule 12 of the Andhra Pradesh State Judicial Service Rules framed through G.O. Ms. No. 2207, Home (Personnel-A) Department, dated 4-11-1962 as illegal, arbitrary etc., in view of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in All India Judges Association and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. dated 21-3-200...
K. Satyavathi Vs. Registrar General, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD803; 2002(4)ALT452
AR. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard Sri K.G. Krishna Murthy, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Smt M. Bhaskara Lakshmi, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st and 2nd respondents and Sri P.Rambhoopal Reddy, the learned Counsel for the 3rd respondent.2. A notification was issued in Dis.No.140/1999, dated 7-1-1999 by the District Judge, Chittoor calling for applications for recruitment to the posts of copyist and other categories. As per the said notification two posts of copyists were notified for general category of which one was for women and other 10 posts for Backward Class, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates. In the notification the required qualifications are mentioned for the post of copyist with which we are now concerned in the present writ petition. The qualifications prescribed are:Intermediate with typewriting (English) lower grade and must know Telugu writing.3. Pursuant to the said notification the writ petitioner applied for the post of copyist and attended f...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »