Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
E. Anand Kumar Vs. Dr. A. Narahari Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD680; 2002(6)ALT356
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. This civil revision petition was filed challenging the order dated 1-7-2002 of the II Additional District Judge, R.R. District, Hyderabad allowing IA No. 1000 of 2002 in A.S. No. 8 of 2002.2. Respondents 1 and 2 (plaintiffs) filed the said IA No. 1000 of 2002 under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC for grant of permission to them to amend the plaint. The said amendment and the reasons are very lengthy and the same need not be extracted since they were already recorded by the appellate Court. However, the amendment sought for by respondents 1 and 2 (plaintiffs) is to the effect that they may be permitted to amend the plaint from the one for declaration of title to the one for recovery of possession. The suit was originally filed for declaration of title and for injunction. The trial Court upon considering the evidence both oral and documentary on record decreed the suit in favour of respondents 1 and 2 (plaintiffs). Challenging the same, defendant No. 12 preferred AS No. 8 of...
Srinivasa Book Depot, Book Sellers and ors. Vs. Bank of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD126
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J. 1. The respondent herein filed O.S. No. 188 of 1993 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nizamabad against the petitioners for recovery of an amount of about Rs. 20,000/- together with interest at the rate of 16.5% per annum. The suit was decreed on 24.11.1995. Inasmuch as the petitioners/plaintiffs mortgaged the property as security for payment, a preliminary decree was passed granting six months time for redemption of the mortgage. The petitioners/plaintiffs did not redeem the mortgage in that period. Thereafter the respondent appears to have filed the application for passing final decree. Since there was delay of 787 days in filing the same, it filed I.A. 1694 of 2001 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay. The petitioners resisted the same pleading that the delay was not properly explained. The trial Court in its order dated 11.3.2002 condoned the delay. Hence the revision.2. Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, learned Counsel for the p...
Hotel Dwaraka Deluxe Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Labour and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD844; [2003(96)FLR416]; (2003)ILLJ678AP
S.R. Nayak, J 1. Both the writ appeals are directed against the common judgment and order of the learned single Judge dated 11-2-2002 passed in Writ Petition No. 8129 of 1996 and Writ Petition No. 18379 of 1994. Writ Appeal No. 820 of 2002 is filed by the Management of Hotel Dwaraka Deluxe whereas Writ Appeal No. 1470 of 2002 is by M/s Hotel Dwaraka Palace. Hotel Dwaraka Deluxe is the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 8129 of 1996 whereas M/s. Hotel Dwaraka Palace is the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 18379 of 1994 and in the said writ petitions the following identical relief was sought:Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order, direction or a writ particularly one in the nature of mandamus, declaring that the 1st respondent in exercising the power under Section 48 of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act to issue directions to the 21st Metropolitan Magis...
Kuttiyappan and ors. Vs. Kuppam Rural Electricity Co-op. Society Ltd. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALT96
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. Since the point involved in the present writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioners who are all members of the first respondent-Kuppam Rural Electricity Co-operative Society (for short 'the respondent-Society') obtained electricity connections filed the present writ petitions seeking a direction to the respondents not to disconnect residential and agricultural electricity supply connections of the petitioners on extraneous grounds and consequential direction to supply electricity to the petitioners as per terms and conditions stating that they are the permanent residents of Jyothinagar and Adavibadugur villages in Chittoor District of Andhra Pradesh State. The said villages fall under Kuppam Assembly Constituency. On constitution of the first respondent-Society under A.P. Co-operative Societies Act (for short 'the Act') to supply electricity within the Kuppam Assembly Constituency, the petitioners were...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Shanker Gandaiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALT788
ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. This writ petition is filed challenging the judgment dated 7-5-1997 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A.No. 1365/1994. By the impugned judgment, the Tribunal directed the petitioners herein to consider the case of the respondent-applicant in accordance with the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Union of India v. R. Reddappa (Civil Appeal Nos. 4081/1992 dated 5-8-1993) and accordingly regularize his service and sanction pensionary benefits, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of that order. Aggrieved by the said direction, the Union of India, filed this writ petition.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:--The respondent herein who is the applicant before the Tribunal, while working as Driver in South Central Railway participated in a strike during the year 1981. Therefore, he was removed from service with effect from 13-2-1981 on the ground of unauthorized absence...
Palakurthy Venkateswarlu Vs. Noroju Manorama @ Satya Manorama and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD716; 2003(1)ALT231
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Since both the revisions arise out of the same suit, they are being disposed of by a common order.2. Revision petitioner in both the revisions is the 1st defendant. 1st respondent in both the revisions is the plaintiff and respondents 2 to 4 in both the revisions are defendants 2 to 4 in the suit OS No. 13 of 1997 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad, a suit or specific performance of agreement of sale dated 16-9-1992 executed by Venkateswarlu, father of respondents 2 and 3 and husband of 4th respondent in favour of 1st respondent. The suit was decreed ex parte on 27-4-2001 directing respondents 2 to 4 to execute a sale deed in favour of the 1st respondent in respect of the plaint schedule property and no relief was granted as against the revision petitioner who is a tenant in possession of the plaint schedule property. Subsequently revision petitioner filed IA No.303 of 2001 under Order 9, Rule 13 CPC to set aside the ex parte decr...
Tirumalasetti Tulasi Bai and ors. Vs. State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD(Cri)574; 2002(2)ALT(Cri)568; I(2003)DMC740
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. The order dated 20.8.2002 in Crl.M.P. No. 590/2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge is the subject-matter of this petition.2. In a complaint registered under Section 498-A, I.P.C, petitioners herein moved an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438, Cr.P.C. in Crl.M.P. No. 590/2002. The said application was first made over to the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge for disposal according to law. It is stated that the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, without passing any orders on the petition, initiated counseling proceedings between the parties and the de facto complainant. It is stated that since the counseling did not fructify the learned Sessions Judge had withdrawn Crl.M.P. No. 590/2002 to his file from the Court of the 1st Additional Sessions Judge and at the time of hearing of the bail petition the learned Sessions Judge, without disposing the case on merits, by his order dated 28.8.2002 directed the parties to approach Lok Adalat for...
Dhara Mary Pushpalatha Vs. Puvvada Nageswara Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT184
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S.No. 102 of 1983 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Ongole had preferred the present appeal being aggrieved by the decree passed in her favour but imposing a condition of payment of interest at the rate of 24% per annum from 21-8-1980.2. The facts in brief are that the appellant/plaintiff filed O.S.No. 102 of 1983 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Ongole for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 7-6-1980 executed by the respondent/ defendant agreeing to sell the plaint schedule property at the rate of Rs. 650/- per gadi. The recitals in the said agreement of sale were that Rs.1,000/- was paid on the same day, the balance of sale consideration was payable at the time of execution of the registered sale deed, and if the balance of sale consideration is not paid within one month, interest at the rate of 24% is payable on the balance of sale consideration till execution of the sale deed and amount of Rs.10,000/- was paid on 21-8-1980...
K. Vijay Bhaskar Vs. the Revenue Development Officer and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD207
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed praying for the issue of writ of mandamus declaring the Notification issued by the 1st Respondent published in Eenadu daily on 11-1-1999 and also G.O.Ms.No. 99, dated 22-10-1998 issued by the 2nd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Art.14 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the judgment of this Court and pass such other order or orders, as this Court deems fit. 2. The facts of the case are that the Petitioner's father, by name K. Anandam, was the fair price shop dealer of Shop No.93 of Ursu and he worked for more than 28 years without any complaint. He died in the month of September 1998. Consequent upon the death of the Petitioner's father, the vacancy of the fair price shop dealer arose. To fill up the vacancies of fair price shop dealers, including that of shop No.93 of Ursu village, the 1st Respondent had issued Notification dated 14-8-1998 for about 26 fair price shops. In the said Notification, the Shop No.93 was earmarked f...
Chippa Raghuramulu and ors. Vs. Kata Showariah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD350
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. This civil revision petition is filed against the order of the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District dated 23-12-2000 made in Case No. F2/1040/2000.2. The petitioners herein are claiming title in respect of the suit schedule property bearing Sy.Nos 367, 368 and 369 admeasuring about Ac.32-07 gts situated at Nadargul village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District through the landholder of Shaik Alladdin. It is the case of the petitioners herein that one Shaik Alladdin was the landholder of the said lands after his death, his legal representatives sold the land to one Smt. Vidya Mashalkar W/o. Bhagawanth Rao Mashalkar under a registered sale deed dated 2-12-1965. As per the contents of the sale deed it is stated that Mohammed Jamaluddin, Mohammed Imamuddin sons of late Mohammed Alladdin sold the land admeasuring Ac.45-07 gts of land comprising of Sy.Nos. 367, 368 and 369 of Nadargul village in favour of Smt. Vidya Mashalkar. It is further stated that Smt. Vidya...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »