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.
Bar Association Cuddapah Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD345; 2002(5)ALT179
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard Sri M.R.K. Chowdary, learned senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP No. 5647 of 2002, Sri M. Sudhir Kumar and Smt. B. Sudha, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in WP No. 8096 and 8196 of 2002 respectively, Mr. S. Chandra Rao, Mr. C. V. Nagarjuna Reddy and Smt.Bhaskara Lakshimi learned Standing Counsel appearing for the High Court and the learned Government Pleader for Home.2. All these writ petitions were filed for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Government of Andhra Pradesh in issuing the impugned order in G.O. Ms.No. 38, Law (LA & J Courts-C) Department dated 8.3.2002 directing the shifting of II Additional District and Sessions Judge's Court from Cuddapah to Proddatur with its staff and other paraphernalia as illegal, void, discriminatory, without power, jurisdiction or authority and contrary to the provisions contained in A.P. Civil Courts Act, 1972 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, and consequently to direct the r...
Sri P. Purushotham Reddy and anr. Vs. Pratap Steels Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2002
Reported in: AIR2003AP141; 2002(6)ALD29; 2002(5)ALT438
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The defendants in OS No. 1159 of 1989 on the file of the V Additional Judge, City Civil Court. Hyderabad are the appellants. The respondent's suit for specific performance has been decreed by the trial Court.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as plaintiff and defendants throughout this appeal.3. On 31-10-1987 an agreement for sale was entered into between the defendants and the plaintiff, where under they agreed to sell and purchase the house property together with the land admeasuring 4820 Sq. Metres for a consideration of Rs.40,25,000/- (Forty lakhs twenty five thousands). In all a sum of Rs. 6 lakhs (six lakhs) has been paid by the plaintiff as and by way of earnest money. The plaintiff agreed to pay a further sum of Rs.2 lakhs (two lakhs) to the defendants as and by way of further earnest money before 15-12-1987. The balance of sale consideration of Rs.32,25,000/- (thirty two lakhs twenty five thousands) to be paid by the plain...
Vantipalli Nagabushanam Vs. Vantipalli Narendra and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALT495
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The unsuccessful 1st defendant, aggrieved by the judgment and decree made in O.S. No. 104/82 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Narsapur, in relation to certain items of the plaint schedule property, had preferred the present Appeal. Respondents 1 and 2 in the Appeal are the plaintiffs in the suit and respondents 3 and 4 are defendants 2 and 3 in the suit.2. The plaintiffs/respondents 1 and 2 filed the suit for partition on the ground that they are the sons of 2nd defendant and defendants 2 and 3 are the brothers and sons of the 1st defendant. It was pleaded that at the time of the 2nd defendant's marriage with the mother of the plaintiffs the latter's father presented her an amount of Rs.30,000/- towards Pasupu Kumkuma as per tradition and custom in the family and gave the said sum of Rs.30,000/- to the 2nd defendant for improvement and for purchasing lands in the name of Neelaveni. Thereafter with the said amount and other amounts given to her, the 2nd defendant pu...
Land Acquisition Officer/Revenue Divisional Officer, Miryalaguda Vs. L ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD129; 2003(4)ALT326
Dalava Subrahmanyam, J. 1. The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Miryalguda, Nalgonda District (for short 'the LAO') filed A.S.No.3286 of 2000 against the decree and award dated 26-8-2000 passed in OP No.59 of 1994 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda in enhancing the compensation at Rs.55,000/- per acre for the lands acquired with solatium and further interest from 8-2-1971 at 9% per annum for one year and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation. 2. The LAO, Miryalguda filed AS No. 1157 of 2001 against the decree and award dated 17-1-2001 passed in OP No.57 of 1994 in enhancing the compensation at Rs.55,000/- per acre for the acquired lands with solatium and further interest at 9% per annum from 8-2-1971 for one year and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation. 3. Writ Appeals 1417 of 1997 and 1431 of 1997 were tiled by the Government against the common order dated 14-9-1995 passed in WP No. 12276 of 1994 and WP No....
Nallabothu Purnaiah Vs. Garre Mallikarjuna Rao (Died) by Lrs. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD260
T. Ch. Surya Rao, J. 1. The unsuccessful plaintiff has preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 9-11-1992 passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Narsaraopet in O.S. No. 117 of 1983. Respondents 1 to 3 are defendants in the suit, respondents 4 to 8 have been added as legal representatives of the first respondent, who since died, pending consideration of the suit.2. A common judgment was passed in O.S.I 17 of 1983 and O.S.257 of 1984 by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Narsaraopet as the parties are same in both the suits. Evidence was recorded in O.S. 117 of 1983, and the same was read in evidence in the later suit. After considering the evidence, both oral and documentary, the Court below dismissed O.S.I 17 of 1983 and decreed O.S.257 of 1984. The appellant therefore is now assailing the Judgment and Decree O.S. No. 117 of 1983 alone.3. The suit was filed for the relief of specific performance of the contract of sale dated 31-1-1981. It is the cas...
T.V. Kameswari Vs. V.R. Sudhakara Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2002
Reported in: 2004(1)ALT87
P.S. Narayana, J.1. These two Appeals arise out of a Common Judgment made in O.S.No. 350/82 on the file of II Additional Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam and O.S.No. 131/82 on the file of the same Court.2. One Thangirala Venkata Avadhani filed O.S.No. 131/82 for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property after evicting the defendants and for the relief of permanent injunction and O.S.No. 350/82 was filed by one Sudhakar Rao as against Thangirala Venkata Avadhani and certain others for the relief of specific performance of an oral agreement of sale relating to the plaint schedule property. The said Thangirala Venkata Avadhani died during the pendency of the said suits no doubt T.A. Kameswari, the appellant in the both the suits had been brought on record as the legal representatives of the said Venkata Avadhani. In O.S.No. 131/82 the said Venkata Avadhani as plaintiff had pleaded as follows:The Staff of Andhra University formed a Co-operative Society. The said Society purcha...
V. Nagenderlal and ors. Vs. the Member Secretary, A.P. State Electrici ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: 2003(6)ALD42
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J. 1. The controversy in this writ petition is as to the parameters to be taken into account for fixing the date of appointment of an employee, selected consequent upon the selection process by the Selection Committee. 2. The Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board, which is the respondent herein, issued Press Notification on 21-8-1988 inviting applications from candidates for selection and appointment to the posts of Assistant Engineer. The selection process comprised of written test and interview by the Selection Committee. 3. The petitioners, who were Engineering graduates at the relevant point of time, responded to the notification and they appeared in the written test. They were subjected to interview by the Selection Committee. On having been selected, they were issued orders of appointment through different proceedings. While the orders of appointment of petitioners 1, 2 and 4 were issued in proceedings B.P.Ms.No.210, dated 4-3-1989, that of petitioners 3...
Ambam Pedda Sailu and ors. Vs. Viswanatha Tulla and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD125; 2003(3)ALT669
S.R. Nayak, J. 1. This appeal suit preferred by the defendants is directed against the judgment and decree dated 4.8.1995 made in OS No.22 of 1991 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nizamabad. OS No.22 of 1991 was originally filed by the 1st respondent herein, viz., Viswanatha Tulla s/o Rajanna for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule properties and for mesne profits, past and future. During the pendency of the suit, he died and respondents 2 to 5 herein were brought on record as plaintiffs 2 to 5 as the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff. 2. The case of the plaintiff is as follows: He is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule properties and he has raised mango, tamarind, gova and amla trees therein. He has also dug a borewell and fixed an oil engine. As there are fruit bearing trees and the plaintiff lived at a different place, he engaged the services of one Ambam Yellappa to take care of the plaint schedule properties and the fruit bearing...
Super High Tech Vs. Commissioner and Special Officer, Municipal Corpor ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD118
S.R. Nayak, J.1. On a short ground,this writ petition is entitled to be allowedand the impugned order is liable to be Iquashed. 2. The Commissioner and Special Officer, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad by the impugned proceeding No.CE/MCH/TA-1/K2/2000-6508, dated 2-12-2000 has debarred the petitioners herein for a period of one year from Tendering/ Nomination/Unit Rates works in MCH. Although, no citizen has a fundamental rightto insist that the Government and the statutory authorities should contract with him, every citizen fulfilling the prescribed qualifications has a right to apply and to be considered for award of contract and this right is guaranteed by the Constitution of India under Article 14 read with Article 19(1)(g). Such a fundamental right of the petitioners has been taken away by the impugned proceeding without hearing the petitioners. Thus, one could find an apparent infraction of principles of natural justice and violation of postulates of Article 14 of the Constitut...
Damalanka Gangaraju Vs. Nandipati Vijayalakshmi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD140
Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. This appeal is filed against the Order dated 15.2.2002 in I.A.No.554 of 2001 in O.S.No. 7 of 1996 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram.2. The first respondent herein filed the suit for partition and obtained a preliminary decree for partition regarding her share. The appellant is her father. He filed an appeal in A.S.No.713 of 2000 on the file of this court against the preliminary decree obtained by the first respondent herein. In that appeal, this court granted stay of passing of final decree alone in the said civil suit. The said order was passed on 7.4.2000. The said order is still in force. During the pendency of the appeal, the first respondent filed a petition requesting the trial court to determine past mesne profits. The said petition is pending in the trial court. The first respondent filed another petition under Order XL Rule 1 C.P.C., requesting the trial court to appoint a Receiver to take possession of plaint 'A' schedule properties an...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »