Andhra Pradesh Court February 2003 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.
Ganji Mohan Vs. State of A.P. Rep., by Its Secretary Randb [R-iii] Dep ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(6)ALD83; 2003(4)ALT162
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the land admeasuring Ac.0.18 gts. comprised in S. No. 582/1/A situated at Shivareddyguda village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. He was utilising the land for floriculture and raising Jasmin, Mogra, Rose gardens etc. His land is situated at Km 21/8-10 of Hyderabad - Hanamkonda near a bridge where the respondents proposed to construct a new bridge and a new road. He alleges that respondents approached him and after negotiations agreed to assign Ac. 0.37 gts. of Government land in lieu of Ac.0.18 guntas of land belonging to the petitioner which was proposed to be acquired for construction of a new bridge. He alleges that an agreement was entered into on 18.1.1990 to that effect. The necessary Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act) was published in Gazette on 20.12.1990. As proposed, new bridge was constructed, but the respondents did not give land in lieu of compensati...
Yerra Sanyasi Naidu Vs. Choppa Akkulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD590; 2003(2)ALT738
ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. A short point is involved in this revision petition. The petitioner was an auction purchaser being the highest bidder of sale of properties, which were brought on sale by the District Co-operative Central Bank, Visakhapatnam to which the properties had been mortgaged against a loan borrowed by one Budi Suryanarayana and his father Satyanarayana, After the properties were auctioned, the petitioner was able to take possession of some of the properties and some of the properties he could not take possession of because it was resisted by the respondent. In between the respondent filed a suit in which he obtained a stay. The petitioner filed an application under Sub-rule (15) of Rule 52 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1964 before the Trial Court seeking possession of the schedule property which was resisted by the respondent on merits as well as on the ground that the application was time barred. On merits the Trial Court agreed with the petitioner, but on t...
A. Ekambara Naicker Vs. Land Acquisition Officer-cum-revenue Divisiona ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALT296
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. An extent of Acs. 58.63 of land covered by S.No. 511/2 of Palamaneru village was acquired in 1988 for the purpose of establishing industrial estate by A.P. Industrial and Infrastructure Corporation Limited. An Award was passed being Award No. 1 of 1988 on 26-8-1988. The first respondent issued notice of Award as required under Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act) to all the land owners on 26-8-1988. The petitioner, whose land admeasuring Ac. 1.18 was acquired, was also issued such notice informing that compensation awarded by the first respondent will be paid to the land owners on 17-9-1988 at 11.00 a.m. in the office of the Sub-Collector, Madanapalle, the first respondent herein. The petitioner also appeared before the first respondent and was paid an amount of Rs. 65,457.05 ps. being compensation for Acs. 1.18 covered by S.No. 536 belonging to him.2. The petitioner and thirty others filed a writ petition being W.P....
Jaladi Seetharamamma and anr. Vs. Sri Ramalingeswara Swami Temple
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2003
Reported in: 2004(6)ALD739
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. All these matters arise out of certain proceedings initiated under the provisions of A.P. (A. A) Tenancy Act, 1956 (for short 'the Tenancy Act') against the termination of the tenancy in respect of agricultural lands belonging to or give or endowed for the purpose of charitable or Hindu religious institutions or endowments as defined under the provisions of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short 'the Endowments Act').2. In these cases, the lands held by the institutions were given on lease to private parties. The relationship between the landlord and tenant are regulated by the Tenancy Act until the advent of the Endowments Act. Therefore, various applications were made either by the landlord or tenant, as the case may be, seeking the various reliefs in each of these applications before the Special Officer. In some cases reliefs were granted and in some cases the Special Officer declined the relief. Aggrieved by ...
Toddy Co-operative Society Vs. Superintendent of Prohibition and Excis ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT815
Motilal B. Naik, A.C.J.1. Appellant is Toddy Co-operative Society, Tandur Toddy Group of villages, represented by its President. Aggrieved by the orders passed on 2-11-2002 by the 1st respondent, a Writ of Mandamus was sought declaring the proceedings dated 2-11-2002 in respect of toddy shop Nos. 2 and 3 of Tandur village as illegal and sought such other relief.2. According to the appellant-petitioner society there was a licence for three toddy shops and also a depot, which is valid up to 31-3-2003. On 31-10-2002 the respondents inspected the toddy shop No. 1 and the depot of the petitioner-appellant and found the toddy available in the shop was adulterated and consequently a crime was registered. In the background of these irregularities found by the respondent No. 1, 1st respondent issued impugned proceedings dated 2-11-2002. It is this order that is challenged before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge, in the facts and circumstances of the case, was of the view that ...
M.S. Anjaiah Vs. N. Rajaiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT665
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri T. Ramulu the counsel representing the revision petitioner and Sri J. Kanakayya the counsel representing the respondents. 2. The Civil Revision Petition was filed along with an application for condonation of delay of one day and the delay was condoned and the matter is coming up for admission. At the stage of admission both the counsel requested that the main civil revision petition itself may be disposed of, for the reason, if the matter is delayed the disposal of the suits will also be delayed. In view of the said representation made by both the counsel, at the stage of admission, the civil revision petition itself is being finally disposed of.3. The Civil Revision Petition is filed by the revision petitioner, the defendant in O.S. No. 4 of 2002 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at Siddipet, aggrieved by an order dated 11-9-2002 which was made on a memo filed in O.S. No. 4 of 2002 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at Siddipet, by the counsel...
V. Santha Kumari and ors. Vs. the District Revenue Officer/Additional ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2003
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD330; 2003(2)ALT361
ORDERRamesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. This writ petition is filed by one V. Shantha Kumari and 9 others. The writ affidavit was sworn in by one Ch. Muralikrishna, S/o late Ch. Ramanadham. In this writ petition the proceedings of the first respondent in No. D5/3467/72 dt.17-8-1996 is assailed on the ground of illegality, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.2. The averments made in the writ affidavit are briefly narrated as follows: It is stated by the petitioners that they are the owners of plot Nos.1, 3, 5, 8, 17, 18, 27, 29, 30, 53 and 54 situated at part of survey number 49/7, Gajularamaram village, Qutubullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners purchased individual plots on various dates from 1968 to 1993 under various sale deeds and acquired title. The details of which have been shown in Annexure-I.It is further stated by the petitioners that an extent of five acres in Sy. No. 49 was allotted in favour of one Smt. Sharada Bai by the Tahsildar, Medchal in his proceedings No. A3/...
S. Umamaheswara Rao Vs. Chief Engineer (Nabard) Roads and Buildings an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD372; 2003(2)ALT372
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. This writ petition seeks a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in prescribing Condition No. 10 in the Tender Notification C.T.N. No. C.E. (R&B;) NABARD/8/2002/2003, dated 17-1-2003, published in the Times of India, as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, without the authority of law, and violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, apart from being contrary to the Directive Principles of State Policy, and consequently direct the respondent not to insist on the said condition and to finalize the tenders without reference to the same.2. The petitioner, who claims to be a Class-I registered Contractor, is assailing the Tender Notification, dated 17-1-2003, issued by the 1st respondent inviting tenders in respect of the works mentioned therein. He is, however, confining his challenge to the Tender Notification insofar as Condition No. 10 is concerned, whereunder the intending tenderer is required to ...
M. Nagabhushanam and ors. Vs. TwIn Cities Steel Re-rolling Mills (P) L ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD99; 2003(3)ALD99; 2003(3)ALT311; 2003(3)ALT311; [2003(97)FLR963]; (2003)IILLJ692AP; (2003)IILLJ692SC
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of a single Judge of this Court in WP No. 13 89 of 1992 dated 30-3-1992 quashing the award passed by the Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-Addl. Labour Court, Hyderabad passed in favour of the workmen.2. The brief facts narrated by the writ petitioner leading to the filing of this appeal are as follows:3. M/s. Twin Cities Re-rolling Mills (P) Ltd., (the management' for brevity) is a steel rolling unit established at Hyderabad in the year 1985. The management took a decision to close the industry and to retrench the workmen on the ground that the industry was facing many problems, including labourunrest and financial crisis and accordingly closed down the Unit with effect from 22-9-1988. They offered to all its workmen a salary of one month in lieu of one month notice required to be given before the closure of the industry and terminated their services from the date of its closure. Some of the workmen received the said a...
idamakanti Ananthamma and anr. Vs. Idamakanti Ramanamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT331
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order dt 5-7-2002 made in O.S.No. 71 of 1996 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Markapur.2. The order under challenge is to the effect that the document, which was sought to be marked was in the nature of a relinquishment deed and hence the same is attracted by the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act and also required to be registered.3. The facts in brief are that the respondent-plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No. 71 of 1996 against her daughter-in-law and granddaughter for partition of the plaint schedule landed properties and also house property by claiming half share in the said properties. Originally the plaintiff filed O.S.No. 2 of 1994 for partition of the properties against her son Sivakasi Reddy. During the pendency of the suit it appears that there was some compromise and pursuant to the said compromise the deceased mother relinquished her rights in favour of the defendant (son) in the said suit and...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »