Andhra Pradesh Court February 2003 Judgments

Land Acquisition Officer-revenue Divisional Officer Vs. Parvathamma (D ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(3)ALD561

G. Bikshapathy, J.1. This appeal is filed by the Land Acquisition Officer challenging the order passed by the Reference Court, learned Senior Civil Judge, Narayanpet, Mahabubnagar District in O.P.No. 2 of 1999. 2. An extent of 10 acres situate in Sy.No. 20 of Kodangal village was acquired for establishing market yard. Section 4(1) notification was issued on 15-5-1990. The Land Acquisition Officer, Narayanpet, passed Award on 11-9-1999. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 29,700/- per acre. On a reference having been made at the instance of the claimants, the Reference Court arrived at the market value at Rs. 72/- per sq.yard and after deducting 40% fixed the market value at Rs. 43/- per sq. yard by an order dated 16-2-2000 passed in O.P.No. 2 of 1999. The said order is challenged by the Land Acquisition Officer in this Appeal. The market yard for whose benefit the land was acquired is also impleaded as a party in this Appeal. 3. The learned G...

G. Chilakamma Vs. G. Sattaiah

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(4)ALD219; 2003(5)ALT354

P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Smt. W.V.S. Rajeshwari representing Sri P. Venugopal, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri Shaik Anwar Pasha, the learned Counsel for the respondent.2. The short question which was raised and argued at length in the Second Appeal is in relation of the reduction of quantum of maintenance by the appellate Court without any basis. The appellant is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 109 of 1988 on the file of the District Munsif, Medchal, R.R. District and the respondent is the defendant. The parties are wife and husband. The suit O.S. No. 109 of 1988 was decreed directing the defendant to pay maintenance of Rs. 800/- per month to the plaintiff from the date of the judgment and pay the costs of the suit. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant/husband filed AS. No. 51 of 1992 and the plaintiff/wife filed A.S. No. 63 of 1992 on the file of the Additional District Judge, R.R. District at Saroomagar, and the appellate Court had modified the judgment and decree made in O.S.N...

Dr. Kondapally Venkateswarulu Vs. Kodela Siva Prasad Rao and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD495; 2003(3)ALT176; 2003CriLJ3354

Motilal B. Naik, ACJ 1. This is a Public Interest Litigation filed by one Dr. Kondapally Venkateswantlu, Medical Practitioner, resident of Narsaraopet, Guntur District. He seeks a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate order or relief declaring the action of the fourth respondent for not giving consent to the fifth respondent for proceeding with the investigation in the criminal cases pending against the first respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice and further seeks a direction to the fourth respondent to give consent to the fifth respondent for proceeding with the investigation in thecriminal case registered against the first respondent and to direct the 5th respondent to proceed with the investigation and file charge sheet in Crime No. 121 of 1991 on the file of Narsaraopet Town Police Station, in the interest of justice.2. The gist of pleadings in the writ petition may be stated thus:3. Petitioner claims to be Medical Practitioner for ...

iskala Venkata Narasimham Vs. Commissioner of Civil Supplies (Appeals) ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD715; 2003(2)ALT698

ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is a retailer carrying on the business in pulses with a valid licence under the A.P. Scheduled Commodities Dealers' (Licensing and Distribution) Order, 1982 (hereafter called 'the Control Order'). On 14-8-1989 the Inspector of Police (Vigilance Cell), Civil Supplies Department, the third respondent herein, intercepted a bullock-cart carrying seven bags of Black Gram Dal which was being carried by one Peruri Brahmaiah. Raising suspicion about the purchase as per the bill, the third respondent surprised the shop of the petitioner on the same day and found that account books were not maintained properly up to date. He seized 27.90 qtls. of Black Gram Dal and 112 qtls. of Black Gram and submitted a report to the second respondent. After issuing a show cause notice dated 20-3-1990, the second respondent passed an order on 29-1-1992 ordering confiscation of 50% of the seized stock and imposed a fine of Rs. 500/- on the owner of the bullock-cart. The petit...

Mohd. SharfuddIn (Died) by Lrs. Vs. Mohd. Jamal and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(3)ALD83; 2003(5)ALT86

G. Bikshapathy, J.1. An important question that arises for consideration in this appeal is the binding nature of the temporary injunction Order granted by the lower Court on the LRs. of the party, who suffered the Order as also the interpretation of Order 39 Rule 2(A) of Code of Civil Procedure.2. The LPA arises against the Orders passed by the learned Single Judge in C.C. No. 1412 of 1987 in A.S. No.2301 of 1987 dated 3.4.1998.3. Before going into the contentions raised in the LPA, it is necessary to refer to the factual matrix which lead to the filing of the appeal. Plaintiffs filed suit in O.S. No. 11 of 1981 before the learned Additional District Judge, Sangareddy for partition of the three schedule properties namely Plaint 'A', 'B' and 'C' properties. One Mr. Sharfuddin was Defendant No.l in the said suit. It is the contention of the Defendant No.l Sharfuddin that 'B' schedule property is his self acquired property. Except claiming the interest in 'B' schedule property, he did not...

Gopisetti Venkaiah Vs. Chavali Brahmabhotlu and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(3)ALD707

ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. The unsuccessful tenants have filed this Civil Revision Petition against judgment passed by the Tenancy Appellate Tribunal (Principal District Judge) Guntur, in ATA No. 38/91 dated 12-1-2000, dismissing the appeal and confirming the order of the Special Officer under the Tenancy Act-cum-Principal District Munsif, Tenali passed in ATC No. 21/84 dated 26-4-1993 which was originally filed by four persons under Section 16 of the A.P. (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act to declare them as cultivating tenants in respect of the petition schedule lands ad measuring Ac.21.00.2. During the pendency of the appeal, the 1st appellant namely Bodaati Valaiah died and his legal representatives were brought on record as appellants 5 to 8 therein.3. For the sake of convenience the parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in ATC No. 21/84.4. Admittedly the petition schedule lands belong to Valeswaraswamy Temple and they were allotted to its archaka. The 1st respondent gave petitio...

Bagadi Narasinga Rao Vs. Kinjarapu Varaprasad and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(1)ALD(Cri)477; 2003CriLJ4414

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner submitted a complaint to the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kotabommali, against A1 to A51, alleging that on 12-7-2001 when the election to the office of the MPTC, Harish Chandrapuram Mandal Parishad, was in progress, the accused formed into unlawful assembly holding stout sticks and country bombs, entered into the polling booth and hurled two such bombs. It was alleged that at the instigation of A-1, A-3 to A-5 again hurled country bombs in order to commit murder of the complainant. The petitioner further alleged that on account of these acts of the accused, the voters in the queue ran away and his polling agent was dragged out.2. The trial Court recorded the statements of P.Ws. 1 and 2. On not being satisfied that there exists a prima facie case, it dismissed the complaint through its order dated 5-12-2001. Hence, this revision.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court proceeded as though it was n...

Secretary, Telecommunications, New Delhi Vs. K.B. Rangachari

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Dr. (Mrs.) Mamata Lakshmanna, Member: 1. This appeal has been filed by the opposite parties in O.P. No. 524/1995 on the file of District Forum, Visakhapatnam. 2. The complainant, who was a resident of Anakapalle, sent a telegram to his son, residing at Hyderabad, bearing No. A-60 dated 6.10.1995 as follows : No response as per your phone, pursue the matter with Director and A.G. However, the message received by his son was Start immediately. As a result, the complainants son took a taxi and with his family reached Anakapalle on 7.10.1995 as he was worried that some thing untoward has happened and all the time he was worried. The complainant, therefore, approached the second opposite party i.e. Junior Telecom Officer, Telegraph Office, Anakapalle and claimed Rs. 2,000/- towards travelling expenses, damages of Rs. 10,000/- and salary loss of Rs. 500/-. However, there was no response from the second opposite party, hence the complaint. 3. The opposite parties filed a counter denying the a...

Zuari Agro Chemicals Ltd. Vs. P. Malla Reddy

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. Opposite Party No. 2 in O.P. No. 211/1995 on the file of District Consumer Forum, Nizamabad is the appellant. 2. The case of the complainant is that he purchased sunflower seeds from opposite party No. 1 vide Receipt Nos. 127 dated 5.1.1994 and 134 dated 7.11.1994 and paid a sum of Rs. 515/- to the first opposite party but the seed is found to be defective and of inferior quality, hence he filed the complaint. 3. The District Forum found that there is deficiency in service on the part of the appellant and directed it to pay a sum of Rs. 18,000/- towards loss of sunflower crop together with compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and costs of Rs. 500/-. Hence the appeal. 4. The appellant denies purchase of sunflower seeds from the first opposite party and raising the crop. It is further stated that the loss of the crop may be due to several factors like defective farm management, improper irrigation facilities, unsuitability of the soil, failure to apply fertiliz...

i.L. Naidu and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD221; 2003(2)ALT470; (2003)IILLJ857AP

ORDERGoda Raghuarm, J.1. W.P. Nos. 25745 of 2001, 18437 of 2001 and 26576 of 2001 and Batch, constitute three classes of disputes between the management of M/s Hindustan Zinc Limited, Visakhapatnam, a Government of India Undertaking and the workmen of Lead Smelter Unit at Visakhapatnam, an Undertaking of Hindustan Zinc Ltd.2. Twenty employees of the Lead Smelter Unit have filed W.P. No. 25745 of 2001 challenging the order of the Government of India dated 22.12.2000 granting permission for closure of the Lead Plant at Visakhapatnam, under Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') with effect from 24.1.2001, on various grounds. Contesting the discharge of workmen on the closure of the Lead Smelter Unit and disputing the claim of the management that redeployment of the workmen of the Lead Plant to other plants of the Company was not possible, one of the recognised unions sought reference of the dispute under Section 10 of the Act, after conciliation in this r...