Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.
Kuruva Venkatanna Vs. E. Lakshman Goud and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: 2004ACJ1032; 2002(6)ALT478
M. Narayana Reddy, J.1. I his judgment, according to law, based on the legal material placed on record arises out of a civil miscellaneous appeal filed by the sole appellant against R-1 and R-2 under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, questioning the validity and legality of the adjudication made by and set forth in para 2, infra.2. Award dated 28.4.2000 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Court of the I Addl. Distt. Judge), Kurnool, made in M.V.O.P. No. 202 of 1998 of its file and the decree of even date that followed the same therein.3. Perused the material papers of the record.4. Arguments were heard of the learned counsel for the sole appellant and learned counsel for the contesting respondents.5. Sole appellant herein corresponds to the sole claimant in the said M.V.O.P. No. 202 of 1998 of the said Tribunal. R-1 and R-2 herein correspond respectively to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 therein.6. After due settlement of the issues in the said O.P. No. 202 of 1998, filed b...
Shaik Khaza Mia Vs. Syed Riyasath Ali and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALT81; I(2003)BC543
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 181/82 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kothagudem, is the appellant herein. Likewise the appellant-plaintiff preferred C.M.A. No. 472/89 aggrieved by the order made in LA. No. 682/88 in O.S. No. 181/92 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kothagudem. The appellant-plaintiff filed the suit against defendants 1 and 2 as an indigent person for recovery of a sum of Rs. 20,000/- towards costs of half of the value of the vehicle together with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of the suit and for costs of the suit. The 1st defendant alone filed written statement and the 2nd defendant remained ex parte.2. In view of the short question involved in the matter, the respective pleadings of the parties need not be dealt with at length. It is suffice to state that on the strength of the respective pleadings of the parties the following issues were settled by the Trial Court :(1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for any amount, if so, to what amo...
Korapotu Veera Narayana Vs. K. Santhamurthy and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT206
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in A.S.No. 89 of 1988 on the file of the Sub-Court, Nandyal reversing the judgment and decree of the Principal District Munsif, Nandyal in O.s.nO. 132 of 1984.2. The appellant herein is the 1st plaintiff and the respondent is the defendant in the suit. The plaintiffs filed the suit for permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from demolishing or effecting repairs or in any manner meddling with the plaint schedule building.3. The plaintiffs averred that the suit schedule building and the open site bearing D.No. 4/552 belongs to them and it was let out to the defendant for running a school in or about 1972 and since then the defendant is continuing as a tenant of the said building. They further pleaded that they came to know that the defendant is contemplating to demolish a portion of the building and to effect some minor repairs to it and if the defendant demolishes a portion of the building there is ever...
S. Venkatesham Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD268; 2002(5)ALT170
B. Prakash Rao, J. 1. The petitioner, who is a practising advocate and holding Notary registration, seeks a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to renew his Notary Certificate as per Section 5(2) of the Notaries Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act').2. Briefly, the petitioner enrolled himself as an advocate in the year 1968 and has been practising as such. Subsequently, he was appointed as a Notary by the respondent No. 1 on 29-5-1984 and was granted initially the said certificate for a period of three years. Thereafter, the said certificate was being renewed once in three years and thus he has been functioning as a Notary for the last about 18 years without any complaints of whatsoever nature. However, as the existing period of renewal was coming to an end on 29-5-2002, he filed an application on 3-1-2002 under Section 5(2) of the Act to the respondent No. 1 through the Commissioner and Inspector-General of Registration and Stamps, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad for the purpose of re...
Palla Sampath Kumari Vs. Kinthala Venkata Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD115; 2003(6)ALT637
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 58 of 1984, on the file of the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Srikakulam, is the appellant. She filed the suit for declaration that the relinquishment deed dated 18-7-1980 [Ex.A-6] executed by her in favour of the 1st respondent (1st defendant) in respect of the plaint 'A' schedule property, hereinafter called the suit property, is not true and is vitiated by fraud, and as such, she continues to be the owner thereof and for the consequential relief of possession of the suit properly by ejecting the defendants [respondents 1 and 2] therefrom.2. The case of the appellant, is that the suit property was purchased by her mother on 16.4.1928 and so consequent on the death of her mother in 1947, as per the Law of succession at that time, she alone became entitled to the suit property absolutely and the 1st respondent who was managing all the properties inherited by her from her mother, fraudulently obtained Ex.A-6 relinquishment deed...
TwIn Cities Cinema Cultural Centre(Formerly TwIn Cities Club) Vs. Comm ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD(Cri)232; 2002(5)ALT805; 2002(2)ALT(Cri)246
AR. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard both sides. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 11-6-2002 is clarified as under.2. The prayer in the writ petition is as follows:'....... to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and direct the respondents to forbear from interfering/obstructing the petitioner Cultural Centre from conducting the card room where the members and guests of the petitioner Cultural Centre are allowed to play the game of rummy with stakes/syndicate (13 card game).' 3. Therefore, the police authorities cannot obstruct the writ petitioner-Club from conducting card room where the members and guests of the writ petitioner's cultural centre are allowed to play the game of rummy with stakes/syndicate (thirteen card game). At the same time, we make it clear that the police is always at liberty to enter the premises and check as to whether the cultural centre of the Club is conducting card room where the members and guests of petitioner's cultur...
A. Sreenivasa Rao and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD881; 2002(4)ALT475
B. Sudershan Reddy, J. 1. The petitioners herein invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 227 and 228 of the Constitution of India and accordingly pray for issuance of a writ of mandamus or appropriate direction directing the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') to transfer O.A.No.2913 of 2002 filed by the petitioners herein to this Court in order to decide the constitutional validity of the rules called as 'the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Subordinate Service (Supplementary Rules' issued in G.O. Ms. No. 384, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Estt.IX) Department, dated 22-12-2001. 2. Before we proceed further to consider as to whether the petitioners are entitled for grant of any such relief and as to the maintainability of the writ petition, it may be necessary to briefly notice a few relevant facts: 3. The petitioners herein claim to have worked as nominee Village Administrative Officers in leave vacancies for a considerable time. The required ...
L. Rama Seethamma Vs. Telugu Solipuram Narasimha
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD330; 2002(6)ALT239
ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J.1. This civil revision case is filed by the defendant-petitioner against the order passed in IA No. 410 of 1998 in OS No. 29 of 1996, on 19th August, 1999 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Nagarkurnool.2. The backdrop of the case that leads to the filing of this revision, is that the plaintiff-respondent filed a petition in IA No. 410 of 1998 under Sections 38 and 40 of the Indian Stamp Act seeking to send the agreement of sale dated 20-4-1991 to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nagarkurnool for levying stamp duty and penalty in the light of the order of this Court in CRP No. 4269 of 1994, dated 25-7-1996 on the ground that he had filed an agreement of sale executed by the petitioner-defendant on ten rupee stamp paper, which is deficitly stamped. As such the said agreement was referred to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nagarkurnool for impounding. After impounding, the said agreement was sent back to the Court. The Court Fee Examiner of this Court issued a chec...
Mohd. Abdul Samad @ Arif Vs. Mirza Basheer Baig and 3 ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD469
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Revision petitioner filed O.S.No.1838 of 2000 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal, seeking an injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with his possession over the properties specified in the schedule appended to the plaint, and filed I.A.No.3084 of 2000 therein under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. seeking injunction during the pendency of the suit. Since the respondents filed a Caveat, notice of the petition I.A.No.3084 of 2000 was served on the counsel for the respondents. The case of the petitioner is that he purchased the suit property under two agreements of sale dated 3-11-1971 and 1-11-1971 from the father of the respondents and their paternal uncle and was put in possession of the property and that the respondents are trying to interfere with his possession without any right. The respondents disputed the agreements relied on by the revision petitioner. The revision petitioner filed an additional affidav...
J.V. Reddy and ors. Vs. State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD(Cri)520; 2002(2)ALT(Cri)439; 2003CriLJ540
ORDERS.R.K. Prasad, J.1. The petitioners who are accused 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 14 seek for quashing of the proceedings in CC No. 12 of 1999 on the file of the Special Judge for CBI Cases, Visakhapatnam and also the proceedings in Rc. No. 20(A)/95, dated 5-12-1995 by invoking the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482, Cr. P.C.2. A brief resume of background of facts is necessary for appreciation of the case. The Inspector of Police SPE and CBI, Vishakhapatnam, chargesheeted the petitioners and some others in respect of four purchase orders which led to loss to the tune of Rs. 3,44,800/-. They are charge-sheeted for the Offences under Sections 120(B), 420, 477(A) of, IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. The same was numbered as CC No. 12 of 1999 on the file of Special Judge for CBI Cases. Vishakhapatnam. During the pendency of the petition, they filed Crl. M. Ps. 124 and 125 of 2000 in C.C. 12 of 1999 seeking for discharge and also for summo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »