Andhra Pradesh Court March 2003 Judgments

K.V.S. Suryanarayana Vs. Jet Airways and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

C.P. Suresh, Member: 1. The complainant, not satisfied with the quantum of damages awarded to him by the District Forum, has preferred this appeal claiming enhancement of the damages. 2. The facts in brief are the complainant has purchased four tickets for his relatives for travelling from Hyderabad to Bombay by the evening flight of the opposite parties which was scheduled for departure at 18.25 hours. The passengers have to catch another flight to London from Bombay on the same day and they arrived at the Airport at Hyderabad on 11.12.1993 at 5.25 p.m. The flight to Bombay had already left and they were informed that the flight schedule was revised from 7.12.1993 and as per the revised schedule the flight has left at 5.15 p.m. The complainant has protested with the officials of the opposite parties, but to of no avail. But they were accommodated on the next days flight by the Indian Airlines by the opposite parties. Though the opposite parties promised to accommodate them in Bombay, ...

Royal Tyre Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. The complainant is trading in old tyres in the name and style of M/s. Royal Tyre at Nellore. He has taken insurance coverage for the tyres since 1994 renewing the policy from time to time. The second opposite party renewed the same from 5.6.1997 to 6.6.1998 for a sum of Rs. 14,50,000/- after collecting premium of Rs. 6,603/-. While so on the intervening night of 17/18.5.1998 the old tyres lying in the premises of the complainant caught fire. Immediately the fire service authorities were pressed into service to put off the fire. The first opposite party was informed, who deputed Mr. A. Syamal Rao, Administrative Officer of first opposite party along with Mr. D.S. Kamath, Surveyor on 19.5.1998. However the first opposite party offered a sum of Rs. 1,99,852/- towards the loss suffered by the complainant. Though the copy of the survey report was sought for it was not furnished to the complainant. The complainant has not accepted the said amount and filed...

Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. Lt. Col. K.V. Gopal

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. This is an application to condone the delay of 332 days in filing the appeal. 2. What is stated in the petitioners affidavit is that the order copy was dispatched on 26.2.2002 by the District Forum and the last date for filing the appeal was 27.3.2002. As the petitioners offered alternate plots in view of the ban, they filed a clarification memo on 26.3.2002 which was rejected on 1.11.2002. Hence there is a delay of 332 days. 3. We cannot accept this explanation. Filing memo which is not maintainable cannot extend the period of limitation. If the petitioners have taken a chance by filing a memo and kept quiet without filing the appeal till the fate of the memo is decided they can only blame themselves. Therefore, this explanation is far from convincing as it is easy to file some memo or other for extension of period of limitation which it does not help in condoning the delay in filing the appeals. We cannot, therefore, find ourselves comfortable to a...

Godavari Grammena Bank Vs. Teja Poultry Farm

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

C.P. Suresh, Member: 1. The unsuccessful opposite parties 1 and 2 are the appellants before this Commission. 2. The facts in brief are on the application of the complainant, the second opposite party sanctioned a loan of Rs. 11,30,000/- for running a poultry farm of 10,000/- birds and an amount of Rs. 6,00,648.50 ps. was disbursed to the complainant. A comprehensive policy was taken to cover the risk of the sheds in which the poultry farm is to be located and opposite parties 1 and 2 undertook to pay the premium towards the live stock and sheds. Opposite Party No. 1 has deducted Rs. 5,810/- on 7.5.1996 towards premium for the live stock and paid it to opposite party No. 3. On 16.10.1996 a further amount of Rs. 837/- was debited to the account of the complainant towards the premium for the sheds. 3. On 6.11.1996 the sheds were damaged during the cyclone, that occurred on the intervening night of 6th/7th November, 1997, damaging the live stock and the sheds completely. The claim for dama...

Medicherla Ramanamma and ors. Vs. V. Naga Prathap and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: II(2003)ACC589; 2003(3)ALD366

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri K. Gopal, the learned Counsel representing review petitioners-appellants and Sri Bhaskar Rao, the learned Counsel representing the 2nd respondent. The review C.M.P. is filed praying for review of the order passed in C.M.A. No. 3853 of 2002 dated 2.1.2003 made by this Court. The short ground raised in the Review CMP is that the interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of accident till the dale of realization should have been awarded as per the Larger Bench judgment of this Court reported in A.P.S.R.T.C. v. B. Vijaya, : AIR2002AP441 . The question is whether it is a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record so as to attract the provisions of Order 47, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, Sri K. Gopal, the learned Counsel representing the review petitioners in all fairness submitted that the Larger Bench decision was not cited by him by mistake. The learned Counsel also submitted that even the language of Section 4-A(3)(a) of the Work...

Jalligampala Prakash Rao Vs. Food Corporation of India Rep., by Its Di ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(6)ALD10

P.S. Narayana, J. 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter referred to as 'Code' for short, aggrieved by the order dated 14-2-2003 made in E.P. No. 20/2002 in O.S. No. 124/87 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram. 2. The 4th Judgment-debtor in the said E.P. is the appellant and Food Corporation of India, represented by its District Manager, Kakinada, East Godavari District, shown as the 1st respondent in the Appeal is the only contesting respondent/Decree-holder/plaintiff. It is brought to my notice that the Food Corporation of India being vexed with non-realisation of the amount due to it ultimately had resorted to filing the present E.P. under Section 51(d) of the Code to appoint a Receiver to conduct auction of the leasehold rights of the E.P. schedule rice mill. It is stated that the Decree-holder-Food Corporation of India filed E.P. No. 25/2002 for attachment and sale of schedule rice mill and the propert...

Pedamajji Ramana Vs. Pedamajji Ramam and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALT(Cri)146; II(2004)DMC441

ORDERDubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. This revision is filed against the order dated 14.11.2000 in Criminal Revision Petition No. 33 of 2000 on the file of Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram, setting aside the order of the maintenance dated 26.6.2000 in M.C. No. 1 of 1996 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Chipurupalli.2. The petitioner is a minor representated by his mother Kanthamma. His mother filed a petition under Section 125, Cr.P.C. in M.C. No. 1 of 1996, seeking maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month to her and another sum of Rs. 500/- per month to the petitioner herein, on the ground that respondent is the father of the petitioner herein. The mother Kanthamma is legally married wife of Y. Khurmaiah @ Khurma Rao. According to her she gave divorce to her, husband Khurma Rao on 1st December, 1991 under divorce document Ex. P-1. It is her version that while she was living in her parents' house, she developed contact with the respondent, who promised to marry her, and he ...

Mangati Venkatarama Reddy (Died) Per Lrs. and ors. Vs. A. Vindaswamy a ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(4)ALT455

P.S. Narayana, J.1. The legal representatives of the defendant, one Mangati Venkatrama Reddy, are the appellants in the present second appeal. The legal heirs of late Suseelamma had instituted O.S.No. 368 of 1980 on the file of I Additional District Munsif, Tirupati for the relief of specific performance of the contract of agreement of sale and also in alternative for the relief of refund of Rs. 2,400/- at least by way of damages for breach of contract to execute the sale deed with interest thereon at 12% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of realization and for costs. Sri O. Manohar Reddy, learned counsel representing the appellants had made the following submissions:The learned counsel in all fairness submitted that though the defendant had taken a stand denying the execution of the agreement of sale, in view of the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below, the same cannot be assailed in the present second appeal. The learned counsel also had taken me thro...

Smt. Bolleddula Lakshmi Devi Vs. Bolleddula Papanna and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(3)ALD50; 2003(3)ALT513

V. Eswaraiah, J.1. The petitioner herein is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 94 of 1991 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal. The said suit is filed for partition and separate possession of the petitioner's share in the suit schedule properties.2. It is evident from the record that when DW1, during his examination-in-chief, filed an insufficiently stamped and unregistered partition deed dated 22-3-1981 to receive the same as evidence by marking it as an exhibit, the petitioner-plaintiff took an objection for marking of the same. In the circumstances, the learned Senior Civil Judge passed the docket order dated 31-7-2001 admitting the said document into evidence, which reads as under:'After hearing the arguments of both sides, the partition deed which is unstamped and unregistered document though it is unregistered document and can be conferred on the status of admissibility upon the said document. So, the document which is an unregistered partition deed cannot be admissible ...

New Tech. Services Pvt. Limited Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(6)ALT175; [2003]132STC587(AP)

ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J. 1. Aggrieved by the order, dated 20.12.1993 made by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hyderabad in CCT's Procs. No. LV(1)2042/1991, this Special Appeal is filed under Section 23(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 by the dealer.2. Appellant was assessed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Begumpet, for the assessment year 1986-87 on a gross and net turnover of Rs.76, 39,610/- and Rs.27, 44,460/- respectively. The net turnover is relating to first sales of cable connectors on which the Assessing Authority levied tax treating the goods as falling under Entry No. 38 of the First Schedule to the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for brevity 'the Act'). The appellant-dealer preferred an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner contending that cable connectors come under 'electronic' goods and systems connected with electronics and that the benefit provided under G.O.Ms.721, Revenue, dated 1.7.1985 would apply and that the appellant is entitled...