Andhra Pradesh Court September 2002 Judgments

K. Vidya Kumari and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), South Central Railw ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2004ACJ1420; 2003(1)ALT65

Bikshapathy, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is preferred by the claimants against the order passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad in O.A.A. No. 135 of 1996 dated 9.12.1997 dismissing the claim for compensation.2. One Bala Krishna Mohan died by accidentally falling down from Nagarjuna Express, while he was trying to board the train on 18.1.1996. Therefore, dependants of the deceased laid a claim for compensation. The Railway Claims Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') held that appellants-applicants are dependants of the deceased. However, on the question as to whether the deceased is a bona fide passenger or not, the Tribunal held that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger. The Tribunal, however, held that the accidental fall of the deceased is an untoward incident covered by Section 123(c)(2) read with Section 124-A of the Railways Act, Accordingly, the Tribunal dismissed the claim of the appellants-applicants by its order dated 9.12.1997, against which the pre...

Suveera Traders/Rice Mill, Rep. by Its Proprietor Mr. N.V.S.V. Prasad ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2002(3)LS252

ORDER1. This writ petition is filed praying for the issue of writ of mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings dated 18-4-2002 as illegal, arbitrary, biased, unconstitutional, against the principles of natural justice, violative of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Dealers (L&D;) Order, 1982; Andhra Pradesh Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1984 and also the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act and the Control Order dated 15-2-2002, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, and to pass such other order or orders. 2. The Petitioners, who are eight in number, are either Millers and Dealers or Wholesale Dealers in rice. It is stated that all the Petitioners are holding valid licenses under Clause III of the A.P. Scheduled Commodities Dealers (L&D;) Order, 1982 (hereinafter referred to 'the Scheduled Commodities Order'). It is stated that the Revenue authorities inspected the business premises of the Petitioners in the month of November 2001 on sus...

Dr. B.G.V. Giridhar Vs. Dr. Ch. Ramakrishna Rao and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2002(6)ALD331

ORDERS.R. Nayak, J1. All these writ appeals are directed against the same order of the learned single Judge dated 10.7.2002 in WP No. 9085 of 2002. WA No. 1169 of 2002 is by one Dr. B.G.V. Giridhar, the 3rd respondent in the writ petition; WA No. 1180 of 2002 is by N.T.R. University of Health Sciences, the 2nd respondent in the writ petition; and WA No. 1495 of 2002 is by State Government of Andhra Pradesh, the 1st respondent in the writ petition. The 1st respondent in these appeals, namely. Dr. Ch. Ramakrishna Rao filed the above writ petition praying for the following relief:'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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus (i) by declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the MD qualification for selection to the post of DM (Neurology) as wholly illegal, arbitrary, unco...

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Shaik Dilshad and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: I(2003)ACC481; 2002(6)ALD325

V.V.S. Rao, J.1. The United India Insurance Company Limited is the appellant in this appeal filed against the Award in O.P.No. 714 of 1993, dated 11.12.1996 passed by the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Cuddapah.2. The respondents herein filed two O.Ps being O.P.No. 714 of 1993 under Section 366 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act'), and O.P.No.715 of 1993 under Section 140 of the Act, claiming an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- and 25,000/-respectively towards compensation for the death caused by the motor vehicle accident that took place on 13.9.1993 due to rash and negligent driving of the van bearing No.APD 5740. The owner of the van, ninth respondent herein, and the appellant -Insurance Company opposed the claim inter alia coutending that the accident did not occur due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the van, the driver was not having valid licence and that the amount claimed is excessive. The claimants examined PWs. 1 and 2 and...

Mrs. C.A. Philomina Vs. Dr. Vijaya Kumar Kodali

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. The facts of the case in brief are that the complainants husband late K.J. Thomas, hereinafter called the deceased, aged about 32 years was working as fitter in a private industry drawing a salary of Rs. 1,735/- per month. While so complaining fever he approached the opposite party nursing home for treatment on 23.8.1995 where he was given two injections and prescribed some medicines on collecting necessary charges. After using the medicine prescribed by the doctor the deceased got severe pain in the right leg. He approached the doctor again on 24.8.1995 and took treatment till 25.8.1995 as in-patient. However he was taken to Nizams Institute of Medical Sciences (NIMS) in a critical condition where he died on the same day at 11.00 p.m. after undergoing operation. All this happened due to the wrong treatment given by the doctor. The discharge certificate issued by NIMS shows the cause of death as cardiac arrest due to gas gangrene. Hence she claims a ...

G. Gopal Rao and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2002(5)ALD625; 2002(5)ALT491

B. Sudershan Reddy, J. 1. This batch of writ petitions may be disposed of by a common order inasmuch as all of them are preferred against the common order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal dated 1-2-1999 made in OA No.3497 of 1995 and Batch (particularly against the orders in OA Nos. 3289 and 3881 of 1994; 294 and 1293 of 1995; 6296 of 1996 and 5435 of 1997). The legality, correctness and validity of the said order are impugned in all these writ petitions.2. The sum and substance of the dispute is with regard to the promotion of Assistant Executive Engineers to the post of Deputy Executive Engineers in both the Roads and Buildings Department and Irrigation Department in the Government of Andhra Pradesh. The dispute essentially is in between the graduate and post-graduate engineers. The Assistant Executive Engineers with post-graduate qualification claim absolute preference over the graduates in the matter of promotion to the posts of Deputy Executive Engineers. The Governme...

M. Netrananda Vs. B. Sambasiva Rao and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2002(6)ALD123

S.R. Nayak, J.1. Both these writ petitions are directed against the common order of the special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (for short, the special Court) dated 5-3-2001 made in LGA Nos. 17 and 39 of 1999 dismissing the Appeals and confirming the order of the Special Tribunal under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (for short, the Special Tribunal) dated 20-11-1998 made in OP No. 756 of 1993.2. WP No. 14058 of 2001 is filed by the applicant in the OP whereas WP No. 11559 of 2001 is by the respondent, who is held to be the 'land grabber' by the Special Tribunal as well as the special Court in the light of the evidence placed on record. Both the Courts below, however, in lieu of delivery of possession of the application schedule land, awarded compensation in a sum of Rs. 1,80,000/- in exercise of the power conferred purported to be under Sub-section (5) of Section (7-A) of the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (for short, the Act). Acc...

A.P. State Road Transport Corporation and ors. Vs. General Secretary, ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD334; (2003)ILLJ952AP

S.R. Nayak, J. 1. By the order under appeal the learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the management -A.P. State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the management') which was directed against the Award dated 8.9.1999 made in I.D. No. 19 of 1998 on the file of the Court of the Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad.2. The relevant facts leading to the filing of the petition can briefly be summarised as follows: The concerned workman while serving as driver in the establishment of the APSRTC, a departmental enquiry was conducted against him in terms of APSRTC Conduct and CCA Regulations (for short 'the Regulations') on the alleged ground that on account of negligence on his part, he caused accident resulting in grievous injury to a minor girl. The Enquiry Authority after holding the enquiry found the workman guilty of the charge. On the basis of the finding recorded by the Enquiring Authority, the disciplinary authority passed the order dated 9.8.1990 removing the ...

S. Malla Reddy and ors. Vs. Future Builders Co-operative Housing Socie ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD402; 2002(6)ALT244

ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J. 1. These two Revision Petitions are filed against the common order dated 4.1.2000 passed by the Court below in I.A. Nos. 415 and 416 of 2000 in O.S. No. 1 of 2000. 2. I.A. No. 415 is filed under Order 6, Rule 16 C.P.C. to strike out the pleadings filed on behalf of the defendants or otherwise to expunge the written statement filed in their names by their previous Advocate Sri Sunil Kumar in O.S. No. 408/1994 on the file of III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, which was transferred and numbered as O.S. No. 1/2000 on the file of the lower Court. 3. I.A. No. 416/2000 was filed by the defendants under Order 8, Rule 9 CPC read with Section 151 CPC to permitthe defendants to file a detailed written statement. 4. By the impugned common order and decree, the Court below dismissed both the I.As. Hence, the defendants in the suit filed the present revision petitions. 5. The suit was filed for declaration of title and injunction with regard to the disputed p...

Manager, Andhra Bank and anr. Vs. International Export Enterprises and ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2002(6)ALT482

Bilal Nazki, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. These two appeals have been filed by 1st defendant and 3rd defendant in O.S.No.91 of 1989 on the file of Prl. Subordinate Judge, Chittoor. The plaintiff who is respondent No.l in these appeals filed a suit before the trial Court seeking recovery of a sum of Rs. 3,92,610/- being the loss of interest, rental charges for the godown and loss of business. He also sought mandatory injunction against 2nd defendant to issue transport permit and certificate of origin to enable the plaintiff to remove the stocks from the godown of 3rd defendant and permanent injunction against defendants 3 and 4 from interfering with the stocks stored in the godown of 3rd defendant. The suit was contested by the defendants and on the basis of pleadings many issues were drawn for trial. However, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that only one question which has been raised and can be considered in these appeals is ...