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.
Vinod Baid Vs. S.G.K. Oriental Degree College
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD(Cri)367; 2002(2)ALT(Cri)406; 2003CriLJ810; [2003]41SCL344(AP)
ORDERS.R.K. Prasad, J.1. The petitioner invokes the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 145 of 1998 on the file of V Additional Munsif Magistrate, Guntur.2. A brief resume of background of facts is necessary. The petitioner is the Chairman of Prudential Capital Markets Limited which is a Non-Banking Finance Company working under the aegis of the Reserve Bank of India and is governed by the Rules and Regulations thereof. In the year 1995, the Company is said to have started accepting Fixed Deposits in lieu of which it promised to give interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum to all the investors. It appears that due to CRB Capital Market Scam in the year 1997, all the investors in the country lost faith in Non-Banking Finance Companies. As a result, the company decided to stop accepting fresh deposits as well as renewing matured deposits. The Company has closed down nearly 60 of their 90 branches all over the country. Several...
Godavarthi Veeralakshmi and ors. Vs. Sangi Ramaraju and Co.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-2002
Reported in: I(2003)BC552
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Defendants in O.S. No. 73 of 1983 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Bhimavaram are the appellants.2. Respondent filed the suit against the appellants for recovery of Rs. 24,824/- being the principal and interest due on the promissory note dated 14.10.1983 for Rs. 20,000/- executed by G. Suryanarayana, husband of first appellant and father of appellants 2 to 4, alleging that the aforesaid Suryanarayana after having borrowed Rs. 20,000/- from it executed a promissory note in its favour agreeing to repay the principal with interest at 24% per annum, but failed to pay the amount due under the promissory note in spite of repeated demands and died leaving behind the appellants as his heirs and that in spite of repeated demands and registered notice through a lawyer also, appellants also failed to pay the amount due under the promissory note executed by Suryanarayana. First appellant filed her written statement, which was adopted by respondents 2 to 4. T...
Siva Samudrudu Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD(Cri)220; 2002(4)ALT268; 2002(2)ALT(Cri)165
Ramesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. Sole accused in Sessions Case No. 26 of 1998, which was decided by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Krishna is the appellant herein. The accused-appellant was tried under two charges. The first charge against the accused-appellant was under Section 302 I.P.C. The learned Judge found him guilty under the said charge and, therefore, convicted him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for twelve weeks. The second charge against the accused-appellant was under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and the learned Judge found him guilty under the said charge and, therefore, convicted him and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default, simple imprisonment for eight weeks. The substantial sentences imposed against the accused-appellant were made to run concurrently.2. The substance of the charge against the accused was that on 11-10-1997 at about ...
State of Andhra Pradesh and ors. Vs. Siddardha Constructions Private L ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD629; 2002(5)ALT1
S.R. Nayak, J.1. These Writ Appeals are directed against the Common Order of the learned single Judge dated 14-2-2001 made in WP Nos. 14529 and 14531 of 2000.2. The respondent Companies viz., M/s. Siddhardha Constructions Private Limited and N. Sambasiva Rao and Company filed the above writ petitions for mandamus declaring the action of the appellants herein in proposing to apply, demand and collect the revised and enhanced Seigniorage fee from them as per G.O.Ms. No. 331, Industries and Commerce (M-I) Department dated 21-6-2000 with effect from 29-6-2000 as violative of Clause (6) of the Lease Deeds executed in favour of them and for a consequential direction to the appellants herein to accept the seigniorage fee at the pre-existing revised rates and to issue despatch permits on that basis.3. The back-ground facts leading to the filing of the above writ petitions may briefly noted as under: The writ petitioners are the companies engaged in Civil Engineering works. The petitioner in WP...
Rajeev Traders, Secunderabad Vs. General Manager, South Central Railwa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD69; 2003(1)ALT55; 2003(1)ARBLR624(AP)
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J. 1. Rajeev Traders, represented by its Managing Partner, has filed this application under Section 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with the Scheme for Appointment of Arbitrator, 1996 of the A.P. High Court, for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator.2. The facts leading to the filing of this application may briefly be noted as under:3. The applicant entered into an agreement with the respondents-South Central Railway on 1-1-1996 for raising of Platform No. l at Jalna Railway Station of Hyderabad Division, valued at Rs. 13,80,579/-. According to the terms and conditions of the agreement, the applicant was to complete the work by 20-3-1996. However, he could complete the same by 9-4-1997. The applicant further contends that according to the terms and conditions of the agreement, he was supposed to raise the length of the platform to a distance of 300 metres, but due to faulty measurements made by the respondents, he raised the length of the p...
M. Sidda Reddy and ors. Vs. Lakshmamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT44; 2002(2)LS494
Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. This appeal is filed against the order dated 11.06.2002 in I.A.No.684 of 2001 in O.S.No.114 of 1976 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Chittoor.2. Respondents 1 and 2 obtained a preliminary decree for partition and filed a petition in I.A.No.450 of 1998 for final decree. In the said application, after contest by the appellants herein and others, the trial court appointed a Court Commissioner to divide suit properties by metes and bounds as per the terms of the preliminary decree.The Commissioner filed his report before the trial court. Thereafter the trial court posted the petition for filing of the objections by the parties to the petition.Respondents herein filed their own objections.Further time was granted for the appellants herein to file their own objections, if any, to the Commissioner's report.The date was fixed for filing the objections as 8.11.2001. On 8.11.2001 the objections were not filed by them. On that day, their counsel reported n...
Noti China Subba Reddy Vs. Pulavarthi Rama Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: AIR2003AP49; 2002(6)ALT532
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The unsuccessful 1st defendant in O.S. No. 51 of 1997 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kavali is the appellant. The suit for specific performance is decreed as against the defendants 1and 2, the father and son but however, the 1st defendant alone had preferred the appeal and the 2nd defendant was impleaded as R2 in the appeal. However, no relief was granted as against the 3rd defendant. The 3rd defendant also is shown as the 3rd respondent in the present appeal. The suit O.S. No. 51 of 1997 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kavali was instituted averring as follows in the plaint : 'The 1st defendant borrowed a sum of Rs. 12.000/- from the plaintiff on 4-3-1976 and executed a promissory note in his favour promising to repay the same together with interest at 12% p.a. He however made no payments for the debt. So the plaintiff caused the issue of a lawyer notice on 30-8-1977 demanding payment. The notice was served on 1st defendant on 3-9-1977....
Donkada Ammajamma Vs. Srikakulam Municipality, Srikakulam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD822; 2003(2)ALT806
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in AS No. 40 of 1990 of the Principal Sub-Court, Srikakulam confirming the judgment and decree in OS No. 217 of 1987 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Srikakulam.2. The appellant herein is the plaintiff and the respondent is the defendant in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that the assessment made by the defendant-Municipality enhancing the tax of her house from Rs. 420/- to Rs. 1444/-per half-year through a separate notice is illegal, arbitrary and ultra vires and for a consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendant from collecting the enhanced tax.3. The plaintiff is having a house in Srikakulam town. The house was assessed with a tax of Rs. 420/- per half-year. The plaintiff let out two portions of the house for the Office of the Deputy Director, Adult Education. The defendant--Municipality enhanced the half-yearly tax from Rs. 420/-to Rs. 1444/-. The plainti...
ibrahim Khan and ors. Vs. Gowram Kondaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD422
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiffs in OS No. 431 of 1984 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge, Ranga Reddy District are the appellants and the respondents in the appeal are the defendants in the suit. Respondents 32 to 38 were brought on record as legal representatives of deceased 16th respondent and respondents 39 and 40 were brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased respondent 17 and respondents 41 and 42 were brought on record as legal representatives of deceased 23rd respondent, vide Court Orders dated 17-3-1992 in CMP No. 11938 of 1990.2. The appellants/plaintiffs instituted the said suit as indigent persons and the appeal also is being prosecuted as indigent persons only.3. The respective pleadings of the panics are as follows:4. The appellants/plaintiffs had prayed for a declaration that they are the owners of the plaint schedule properties and for recovery of possession of the said properties making the following allegations in the plaint.5. ...
Poosapati Appalanarasaiamma, Alias Varahalamma and ors. Vs. Vulli Syam ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD215
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. The plaintiff in OS No. 128 of 1982 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Vizianagaram filed this appeal. The suit is for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 5-12-1979 executed by the respondents in favour of the plaintiff in respect of plaint schedule property for a sum of Rs. 61,000/-. Respondents having admitted execution of the agreement took a plea that plaintiff is not entitled to seek specific performance of the agreement since she did not perform her part of the contract within the stipulated time. The trial Court dismissed the suit after trial.2. During the pendency of the appeal, the sole appellant died and so her lega representatives were brought on record. For the sake of convenience I would refer to the deceased 1st appellant as plaintiff in this judgment.3. The point for consideration is : Whether the plaintiff is entitled to seek specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 5-12-1979.4. Point : The admitted facts ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »