Andhra Pradesh Court November 2003 Judgments
Mallipudi Babu Rao Vs. Mallipudi Prameela Kumari
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD241; 2004(1)ALT264a
Devinder Gupta, C.J.Decree of divorce was passed by the Lok Adalat under the provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. As on the date when petition was presented (11-3-2002) Indian Divorce Act, 1869 stood amended by the Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001 (Act 51 of 2001) which came into force with effect from 3-10-2001. There have been drastic amendments made to the principal Act. The requirement of a decree passed of divorce under the provisions of the principal Act having to be confirmed by the High Court has now been dispensed with. Therefore, reference is misconceived. We answer the reference accordingly....
Tag this Judgment!Sirugudi Adinarayana Vs. Bodla Mariamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD440; 2004(4)ALT1
ORDER1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 22-7-2003 made in LA. No. 476 of 2003 in O.S. No. 720 of 2001 by the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam.2. The learned Trial Judge partly allowed the application filed by the petitioner herein under Order VIII Rule 1(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') to receive certain documents. The learned Trial Judge having allowed the application in part received documents 1 to 3, 5 and 9 only on payment of costs of Rs. 50/- to the other side. The learned Trial Judge did not receive the documents 4 and 6 to 8 on the ground that some of them are not admissible in evidence and some are merely Xerox copies.3. In this civil revision petition, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri P. Satyanarayana, contended that the learned Judge committed an error in deciding the question as to the admissibility of the documents even at the threshold stage and the same is impermissible, in law. The...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Nazar Jani Vs. Syed Peerulla HussaIn and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD397; 2004(4)ALT47
ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. An application was filed before the Trial Court under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking adjournment of O.P. No. 3 of 2001 till a regular Principal Junior Civil Judge was posted. It appears that election of the petitioner as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Chandole has been challenged by way of O.P. No. 3 of 2001 which was pending before the Election Tribunal-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Bapatla. The post of Principal Junior Civil Judge became vacant and I-Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Bapatla was given full additional charge of the Principal Junior Civil Judge who proceeded with the trial. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that since the jurisdiction has been conferred by the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act on the Principal Junior Civil Judge and he was a persona designata, therefore the I-Addl. Junior Civil Judge could not exercise the jurisdiction. He relies on the Rules framed under the A.P. Panchayat Raj (Election Tribunals in respect of Gra...
Tag this Judgment!Pechitti Ramakrishna Vs. Nekkanti Venkata Manohara Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD557; 2004(6)ALT427
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J. 1. Heard Mrs. Rama representing Sri V.L.N.G.K. Murthy, the Counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri Lakshmana Sarma, the Counsel representing the respondents.2. The short question in controversy between the parties is whether the agreement of sale dated 24-8-1998 is properly stamped or not and whether it is liable for stamp duty and penalty as per the provisions of Article 6 of Schedule I-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short 'the Act') as amended by A.P. Act 21 of 1995. The agreement of sale in question dated 24-8-1998 is in relation to the sale of vacant site. The said document is reduced into writing on a stamp paper worth Rs. 50/-. The question now being in controversy is that inasmuch as this agreement of sale falls under Article 6(B) of Schedule I-A of the Act as substituted by A.P Amendment Act 21 of 1995, the stamp duty is payable as specified in column No. 2. Yet another objection is that even otherwise the agreement of sale in question would fal...
Tag this Judgment!Sedam Pandurangaiah Vs. Chavva Guruvaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(4)ALD64; 2004(5)ALT365
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri C. Panduranga Rao, the learned Counsel representing the petitioner in the application, who is the respondent in S.A. No. 685 of 1994 and Sri Gangarami Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the respondent in the application, who is the appellant in S.A. No. 685 of 1994.2. This application is filed by the petitioner to set aside the judgment and decree dated 18-4-2003 in S.A. No. 685 of 1994 and allow the petitioner to submit his arguments in the second appeal and pass such other suitable orders.3. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the application that on account of business necessity, the petitioner had shifted to Srisailam along with his family. It is pertinent to note that the word 'Srisailam' had been inserted in the affidavit with pen. It is also stated that the address given in the appeal could not be changed since he had shifted suddenly. It is further stated that he had no knowledge at all about the pendency of the second appea...
Tag this Judgment!D. Murali Krishna Vs. Ch. Siva Brahmachary
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: I(2005)BC73
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. 1st respondent filed C.C. No. 13 of 2001 against the petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, on the file of IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampalle, Hyderabad. In that case petitioner filed Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 6498 of 2002 seeking his discharge from that case on the ground that he, in reply to the statutory notice got issued by the 1st respondent, made a request to the 1st respondent to represent the cheque into the Bank since he arranged sufficient funds for honouring the cheque which was dishonoured earlier and that 1st respondent without so representing the cheques unnecessarily filed the complaint against him, solely with a view to harass and in convenience him. The learned Magistrate dismissed the said petition and that order of dismissal was confirmed by the learned III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge by the order impugned in this petition.2. The point for consideration is whether the payee of the dishonoured cheq...
Tag this Judgment!Ponnaganti Kondaiah Vs. Mallela Subba Rao (Died) Per Lrs and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(5)ALT505
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The unsuccessful defendant in O.S.No. 1223/78 on the file of V Additional Munsif Magistrate, Guntur, aggrieved by the reversing Judgment and decree made in A.S.No. 28/82 on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Guntur, had preferred this Second Appeal.2. The plaintiff who had instituted the suit being unsuccessful in the original court had obtained a decree by virtue of the reversing Judgment made by the appellate Court. The said plaintiff, it is represented, died during the pendency of the Appeal and inasmuch as though the legal representatives were brought on record, the same was not shown, in the present Second Appeal, the said legal representatives-respondents 2 to 5, are brought on record. The dispute is in relation to the statement (sic. settlement) of accounts of an unregistered partnership firm. There is some controversy even in relation to the dissolution of the firm - the plaintiff asserting that the firm continues and the defendant takin...
Tag this Judgment!Killaparthi Suri Appa Rao Vs. Sub-inspector of Police and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD(Cri)227; 2004(1)ALT301
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The second respondent gave a complaint to the first respondent alleging that the petitioner abused her against her chastity in the presence of Mandal Revenue Officer and Nodal Officer and also threatened her to kill. The first respondent registered a case in FIR No. 40 of 2003 under Sections 509, 506 and 189 of the India Penal Code, 1860. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the first respondent in registering the crime is illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner contends that the offences under Sections 189, 506 and 509 IPC are non-cognizable and bailable offences and, therefore, registration of crime is illegal.2. The writ petition cannot be entertained for two reasons. In effect, the petitioner is seeking to quash Crime No. 40 of 2003 of P.S., Devarapalli.3. By a catena of decisions of the Supreme Court, it is now well settled that in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 182 of the Code of...
Tag this Judgment!D.V.V. Narasimham, S/O Ram Naidu Vs. Commissioner for Endowments, Gove ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALT794
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam, Simhachalam, (hereinafter called, the Temple), issued a public auction notice, dt. 27-2-2003 proposing inter alia to auction right to collect fee from pilgrims for coconuts at Bhairavavaka, down-hills of Simhachalam Temple. The petitioner, who was successful bidder in the auction conducted on 8-1-2003 for leasing out right to collect fee for coconuts, assailed the action of the Temple in re-auctioning the right as illegal and arbitrary.2. The facts in brief leading to filing of the Writ Petition are as follows. The Temple conducted auction on 8-1-2003 for grant of licence to collect fee for coconut. The petitioner became successful bidder for one year. On the day of the auction he paid an amount of Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only). He was also required to pay the balance of amount of Rs. 76,000/-(Rupees seventy six thousand only) within fifteen days, as the bid was for Rs. 1,16,000/- (Rupees one lakh sixteen...
Tag this Judgment!R. Krishnaiah Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2003
Reported in: 2003(6)ALD897; 2004(1)ALT178
Devinder Gupta, C.J.1. Sri R. Krishnaiah, President of Andhra Pradesh Backward Classes Welfare Association in this petition filed as Public Interest Litigation seeks to question the legality and validity of the decision taken by the Governor of State of Andhra Pradesh to dissolve the State Assembly and requesting the 4th respondent to continue in Office along with his colleagues in the Council of Ministers as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and in violation of Articles 172 and 174 of the Constitution of India and has sought consequential direction to the appropriate authorities to ensure that the term of the State Assembly renders its full term. Along with the writ petition, miscellaneous petitions have also been filed praying that pending disposal of the writ petition the order of the Governor dissolving the Legislative Assembly be stayed, direction be issued to the first respondent, (Union of India) to exercise powers under Article 356 of the Constitution of India and to direct ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »