Andhra Pradesh Court January 2003 Judgments

New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Syed Jaheera and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: III(2003)ACC37; 2004ACJ1833; 2003(2)ALD515

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Kota Subba Rao, the Counsel representing the petitioner-New India Assurance Company Limited and Sri D.V. Reddy, the Counsel representing the 5th respondent-owner of the vehicle.2. This civil miscellaneous application is filed for condonation of delay of 163 days in filing the appeal in O.P. No. 843 of 1998, dated 31-12-2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Guntur. The reasons had been explained in paras 2 to 5 of the affidavit filed in support of the application. It was stated that in the above case the judgment was pronounced on 31-12-2001 and the copy application was filed on 3-1-2002 and stamps were called for on 14-2-2002 and deposited on 14-2-2002, copy was made on 15-2-2002 and delivered on 18-2-2002 and the Appeal has to be preferred on or before 13-5-2002. It was also stated that they have asked to ascertain the financial status of the owner of the vehicle also by the learned Counsel and the...

Ragam Yellaiah and ors. Vs. Chintha Shankaraiah

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(5)ALT403

P.S. Narayana, J. 1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed as against the order passed in C.F.R.No.63 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Siddipet, dated 3-4-2002. The said order is made rejecting the plaint filed, under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter, in short, referred to as 'Code' for the purpose of convenience. 2. Smt.Pramada, counsel representing respondent had raised a preliminary objection relating to the maintainability of the C.M.A. on the ground that the rejection of plaint is a decree within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the Code and hence a regular appeal alone has to be filed under Order 41 Rule 1 of the Code read with Section 96 of the Code. The learned counsel had placed strong reliance on SHAMSHER SINGH vs. RAJINDER PRASHAD1, VADITHO ANANTHARAO NAIK vs. BHOOMISETTY RAJAIAH2 and KONA RAMU vs. THE PAYAKARAOPETA PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED3.Apart from the maintainability of the C.M.A....

United India Insurance Company Limited, Rep. by Its Divisional Manager ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2005ACJ597; 2003(2)ALD775; 2003(2)ALT596

P.S. Narayana, J. 1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by respondent No.4 in O.P.No.148 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Adilabad. 2. The appellant-4th respondent is the United India Insurance Company Limited, represented by its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Adilabad. 3. The facts in brief are as specified hereunder: The parents of the deceased Gorla Laxmi filed O.P., claiming compensation stating that the said deceased Gorla Laxmi was traveling in a jeep bearing registration No.AP.1.8331 on 17-10-1997 from Boath towards Adilabad and 1st respondent, the driver of the jeep, drove the jeep in a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and as a result, the jeep went out of control and dashed to a lorry bearing No.AP.7V.4579 coming in the opposite direction near Devapur Cross Roads on the National Highway No.7 at about 1.10 P.M., and due to the said acci...

The Regional Manager, Apsrtc Vs. Sk. Gulam Rasool

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALT376; [2003(97)FLR950]; (2003)IIILLJ368AP

ORDERBilal Nazki, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. An order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 708/98 is challenged by way of this appeal. It appears that the Writ petitioner was appointed some time back in the Corporation as Driver on casual basis. On 28th October, 1997 a charge sheet was served on him which reads as under:'It is reported and alleged by the Security Officer, Nellore that the driving licence No. 263968/DL/84, submitted by you at the time of recruitment is verified with the concerned authorities and found that it is a non-genuine one. There is one of the condition in your appointment order that 'He is liable for termination at any time if the evidence/ information produced by him is found to be false.' Basing on the above allegations, the following charge is framed against you.Charge:For having produced a non-genuine Driving licence No. 263968/DL/84 at the time of appointment and got yourself selected for the post of driver and cheated the C...

Mykala Subbamma Vs. N. Srinivasa Rao and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD49; 2003(3)ALT223

ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent namely, the Superintendent of Police, Mahbubnagar, to register a criminal case under Section 343 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), to investigate the said offence by the Crime Branch, Criminal Investigation Department (CBCID) and initiate disciplinary action against the first respondent and other policemen who are responsible for allegedly causing the death of her husband. She also prayed this Court to award appropriate compensation to the family of the deceased and pass such other orders as are deemed fit. 2. The petitioner is the wife of one Mahadev and resident of Karni village in Makthal Mandal, Mahbubngar District. She alleged in the affidavit accompanying the writ petition that her husband was taken into police custody by the first respondent on 9-5-2001, confined him in illegal detention and subjected to severe torture and ill-treatment, as a result of which he died in the police...

Batchu Ramakrishna and anr. Vs. Golla Venkata Koteswararao and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD517; 2003(2)ALT542

ORDERDubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. This revision petition is filed under Section 22 of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act') against the judgment dated 9.7.2001 in RCA.No. 25 of 1997 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry, confirming the order of eviction dated 28.7.1997 in RCC.No. 47 of1986 on the file of the Rent Controller-cum-Principal District Munsif, Rajahmundry. The tenants - respondents 3 and 4 in the eviction petition are the appellants.2. Necessary averments for the disposal of this revision petition briefly are as follows:Golla Subbayya, who is the father of the eviction petitioners, in or about 1964 leased out the petition schedule premises to the first respondent - Batchu China Koteswara Rao on a monthly rent of Rs. 125-00. From the year 1980 the monthly rent is Rs. 400-00. The petitioners sought the eviction of the tenant - first respondent on three grounds. The first ground is that after taking the petition sch...

Khaja MujeebuddIn Vs. Khaja Muneeruddin

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(4)ALD854

ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J. 1. Petition filed by the revision petitioner under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking a direction to the respondent [landlord] to pay the arrears of the property tax amounting to Rs. 44,627/- in respect of the premises let out to him was dismissed by the Court below by the order under revision.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that since there is likelihood of the Municipal Corporation recovering the property tax due on the demised premises, in case respondent does not pay the same, as per the provisions of Section 276 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), and since the amount deposited by the revision petitioner towards rent is available in Court, respondent may be directed to pay the arrears of property tax due to the Municipal Corporation from the amount lying in deposit in Court.3. As per Section 276 of the Act, if the owner of the premises, who is not in occupation of the buil...

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gorla Shankar and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 3(2005)ACC204

P.S. Narayana, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act/1988 by respondent No. 4 in O.P. No. 148 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Adilabad.2. The appellant-respondent No. 4 is United India Insurance Co. Ltd., represented by its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Adilabad.3. The facts in brief are as specified hereunder:The parents of deceased Gorla Laxmi filed O.P., claiming compensation stating that the said deceased Gorla Laxmi was travelling in a jeep bearing registration No. AP 1-8331 on 17.10.1997 from Boath towards Adilabad and respondent No. 1, the driver of the jeep, drove the jeep in a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and as a result the jeep went out of control and dashed to a lorry bearing No. AP 7-V 4579 coming in the opposite direction near Devapur Cross Roads on the National Highway No. 7 at about 1.10 p.m. and due to the said accident, one person d...

Narendruni Hymavathi Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. The complainant is the appellant. Here case is that though the opposite party Insurance Company settled her claim favourably, interest was not paid for the delayed period. 2. The facts of the case are that her husband died in a motor vehicle accident on the night of 1.9.1998 while two insurance policies for Rs. 5 lakhs each were in force. As per the conditions of the policy, Rs. 1,50,000/- has to be paid when the policy holder dies in an accident. She was shown as the nominee in both the policies, hence she claims the benefits under those policies. The opposite party paid Rs. 5 lakhs by way of a cheque on 23.2.1999, Rs. 1,50,000/- on 24.2.1999 and Rs. 5,25,666/- on 16.3.1999. Therefore, she is entitled to interest on the said amount from 17.9.1998 i.e., 15 days after the date of death of her husband. 3. The District Forum rejected her contention. The complainant admittedly submitted some of the documents on 17.9.1998. She finally submitted legal heir...

S. Rema Nair Vs. Dean and Chief Executive Officer and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, Member: 1. The unsuccessful complainant in C.D. No. 805/99 on the file of District Forum, Nellore is the appellant. 2. The complainant being a Principal and Correspondent of an Educational Society at Nellore purchased Omni bus bearing Registration No. AP-13/TR 1286 in June, 1997 from the first respondent through the second respondent and paid Rs. 60,000/- out of sale consideration of Rs. 85,000/-. As the documents were not delivered, this complaint was filed. 3. The District Forum felt that since the complainant did not pay the balance of Rs. 25,000/- the opposite parties are not bound to deliver the documents. It accordingly dismissed the complaint. Hence the appeal. 4. Ex. A-1 is the letter executed by the first respondent authorising the second respondent to sell the vehicle and the latter issued Ex. A-2 letter stating that he sold the vehicle to the complainant for Rs. 85,000/- and received a sum of Rs. 60,000/- and that he will hand over the records whenever ...