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.
Dasu Jaya Vani and ors. Vs. Bala Seethapathi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: AIR2003AP293; 2003(2)ALT284
ORDERD.S.R.Varma, J.1. Since the issue involved in both the Civil Revision Petitions is interrelated and the parties being the same, they are disposed of by this common order.2. C.R.P. No. 6018 of 2001 is filed challenging the order and decree, dated 21-12-2001, rejecting the application in I.A. No. 3222 of 2001 in O.S. No. 166 of 1997 filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to re-open the suit to examine two witnesses on their behalf, while C.R.P. No. 440 of 2002 is filed challenging the order and decree, dated 21-12-2001, rejecting the application in I.A. No. 3223 of 2001 in O.S. No. 166 of 1997, filed under Order-26 Rule-11 of the Code of Civil Procedure to issue a commission for examination of two witnesses mentioned in the affidavit, filed in support of the application.3. Petitioners are defendants 2 to 4 (for brevity 'D-2 to D-4') and respondents are plaintiffs. The suit is filed for partition.4. For the sake of convenience, the parties are being referred as defend...
Sarwar Bee Vs. Utla Bikshapathi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(6)ALD73; 2003(3)ALT503
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two revisions arise out of the same proceedings before the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kamareddy.2. The respondents herein filed O.S. 61 of 1994 against the petitioner for the relief of declaration of title recovery of possession and permanent injunction. The petitioner was served with notice but she did not respond. In view of the same, she was set ex parte and ultimately ex parte decree was passed on 11.9.1998 in the suit. Respondents also filed E.P. 34 of 2000 for execution of the decree in O.S. 61 of 1994.The decree was executed on 24.12.2000 by delivery of possession of the suit schedule property through the Bailiff of the Court.3. The petitioner came to know about the fact of the suit having been decreed ex parte and the execution of the decree only at that stage. She filed an application to set aside the orders passed in E.P. 34 of 2000. Since there was delay she filed E.A. 502 of 2000 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The ...
Ch. Krishna Rao Vs. the State of A.P., Rep. by Public Prosecutor
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT32; 2003CriLJ2927
ORDERDubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. This revision case is filed against the judgment dated 9-1-2001 in Criminal Appeal No. 508 of 1999 on the file of IV Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, confirming the conviction and sentence dated 23-9-1999 in C.C. No. 1057 of 1996 on the file of Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (Prohibition and Excise) Guntur.2. According to the prosecution on 17-10-1993 at about 7.30 p.m., the house of the accused was searched by Excise Officials in the presence of punch witnesses and they found a brass vessel containing 82 sachets, out of them 13 sachets did not bear any mark of the district and the remaining sachets were found having stamp of Medak district. As per the Analyst report, the samples collected from out of those sachets contained diluted arrack. The plea of the accused is total denial. The learned Magistrate found the accused guilty and convicted him for the offence punishable under Section 34(f) of A.P. Excise Act (for short 'the Act'). The lear...
Government of Andhra Pradesh Vs. D. Pochaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD717; 2003(3)ALT56; 2003(2)ARBLR408(AP)
ORDERDubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. The revision petition and appeal are filed against the common judgment passed on 23-1-1998 in O.S. No. 42 of 1993 and O.P. No. 121 of 1993 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar. The Government is the appellant in the revision petition as well as in the C.M.A.2. The respondent is a contractor. He entered into an agreement on 3-3-1981 with the appellant herein for the work of special repairs to Allur and Jagityal Dharmapuri road from K.M. 0/0 to 13/3 in Karimnagar District. There is an arbitration clause in the agreement. Disputes and differences arose between the parties regarding execution of work. Thereupon, the contractor filed O.P. No. 216 of 1985 in the Civil Court for removal of designated arbitrators, on the ground that they failed to make award within the stipulated period of four months. He requested the Court to appoint another arbitrator. Thereupon, the Civil Court appointed Sri Mallikarjuna Rao, K. a retired Chief Engineer, as sole a...
Maguluri Venkata Subba Rao Vs. Syed Khasim Saheb and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD134; 2003(3)ALT318
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. This revision petition is filed challenging the order and decree dated 22.11.2002 passed by the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Podili, Prakasam District in I.A.No. 108/2002 in O.S. No. 68/2000.2. By the impugned order, the Court below dismissed the I.A. filed by the plaintiff under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment of the plaint. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the plaintiff filed this revision petition.3. The parties shall be referred to as per their array in the original suit, for convenience.4. The brief facts are that initially the plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction against defendants 1 and 2. His claim is that he purchased the suit schedule property from one Maguluri Venkata Subbaiah, under an agreement of sale dated 14.5.1986 and that since then he has been in possession. As the defendants areinterfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment, he filed the suit for permanent injunction.5. The defendants filed the written statemen...
H. Rajagopal Vs. D.C. Mehta
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD(Cri)993; 2003(1)ALT(Cri)547; III(2003)BC329; [2003]44SCL187(AP)
Gopal Krishna Tamada, J.1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 13-4-1998 passed in C.C. No. 205 of 1997 on the file of the VI Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Visakhapatnam acquitting the sole accused respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the Act'), the unsuccessful complainant filed the present appeal.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant was doing transport business and also a social worker and he knows the accused in connection with his business. The appellant has lent a sum of Rs. 5,17,700 to the accused and in discharge of the said loan; the respondent issued a cheque for Rs. 5,16,700 dated 25-8-1992 drawn on Andhra Bank, Pittapuram Colony branch. The appellant presented the said cheque for encashment in the Bank of India on 7-9-1992 in which he was having an account and his banker sent the cheque to the Andhra Bank, but the same was returned with an endorsement 'funds insufficient' and thereupon the ...
Kadavandi Krishna Chari Alias Krishnachari and Etc. Vs. the Diocese of ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: AIR2003AP340; 2003(4)ALT743
P.S. Narayana, J.1. These Second Appeals are filed by the unsuccessful tenants/defendants in the respective suits referred to infra aggrieved by the reversing judgments and decrees made in the respective Appeals by the learned Principal Sub-ordinate Judge, Narsaraopet and the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gurazala. The respondent, plaintiff in all the suits, is hereinafter referred to as landlord for the purpose of convenience.2. The suits O.S. Nos. 218/89, 221/89, 220/89 and 216/89, on the file of I Additional District Munsif, Guruzala, were filed by the landlord against the respective tenants for eviction and delivery of possession of the respective suit schedule properties. The respective pleadings of the parties in all these suits are virtually the same, except the difference in certain details relating to the dates, and several of the facts also are not in dispute. The appellants in all these Appeals were inducted as tenants in the respective premises specified in the plaint schedul...
The Agricultural Market Committee Vs. Sri Sankar Rao and Company and a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD(Cri)749; 2003(2)ALT(Cri)334; III(2003)BC382; [2005]124CompCas629(AP); 2004CriLJ1291; [2004]50SCL341(AP)
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In this batch of Revisions, a common question of law arises. Hence, they are disposed of through a common judgment.2. The petitioner is Agricultural Market Committee, Adoni, Kurnool District. It is empowered to levy market fee from the traders on purchases and sales of the agriculture produce within the notified area. The 1st respondent in each of the cases is a trader (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondents'). The respondents made the payment of market fee for particular periods through cheques. On presentation, the cheques were dishonoured with endorsements by the Banker that the amount covered by the cheques 'exceeds arrangements'.3. Notices as required under the relevant provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act,. 1881 (for short 'the NI Act') were issued. The respondents, in turn, issued replies requesting time for making arrangements. The petitioner did not take any further steps for quite some time. Ultimately, when the respondents did not keep u...
Vijayawada Municipal Corporation, Rep. by Its Commissioner Vs. A. Srir ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALT333
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, Acting C.J.1. Appellant is the Vijayawada Municipal Corporation represented by its Commissioner. The 1st respondent filed W.P. No. 14026 of 2002 questioning the action of the appellant in canceling the lease granted in favour of the petitioner-1st respondent herein by order dated 26-5-2002.2. The matter was contested before the learned single Judge and the learned single Judge having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case allowed the writ petition by setting aside the order of cancellation of lease in favour of the writ petitioner-first respondent and directed the respondents to open the locks of the leased premises and permit the petitioner to carry on the business. It is this order which is challenged before us in the present writ appeal.3. In order to decide the issue raised in the appeal, narration of few facts are necessary which are as under:On 29-6-2001, the Standing Committee of Vijayawada Municipal Corporation decided to lease out 34 shops cons...
S. Nabi Rasool Vs. the Conservator of Forests Kurnool Circle and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD720; 2003(5)ALT113
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is a licensee of a saw mill. On 31.10.1998, the 2nd respondent conducted a surprise check on the petitioner's saw mill and verified the records. During the inspection, the 2nd respondent found that some species of timber logs were allegedly not entered in the saw mill timber account register and that some timber species logs entered in the saw mill register on verification were found to be not present in the yard. Again on 1.11.1998, presumably on the directions of the 2nd respondent, the 3rd respondent inspected the petitioner's saw mill and submitted a report furnishing the stock position. After verifying the stock position, the 2nd respondent came to a conclusion that there is a huge disparity between the produce available on the ground and stock sown in the saw mill timber account. Therefore, the 2nd respondent issued the impugned memo dated 28.11.1998 directing the 3rd respondent to collect a compounding fee of Rs. 3,00,000/- from the petitioner on ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »