Andhra Pradesh Court May 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.
U. Venkateswara Rao Vs. National Institute of Small Industries Extenti ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALD295
ORDERGulam Mohammed, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:'For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in accompanying affidavit it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the 1st respondent in awarding the work of 'Extensive Renovations of Training Building' (Ground floor + 3 upper floors) at Nisiet campus, Yousufguda, Hyderabad, pursuant to tender notice No. Nisiet/CW/1/2002-03, dated 16-3-2003 ignoring the claim of the petitioner who is the lowest tenderer as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for awarding work in question and to pass other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.'2. The brief facts of the case are thus:The National Institute of Small I...
K.L.N.S. Murthy and anr. Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALD375; 2004(5)ALT592
G. Yethirajulu, J. 1. This batch of writ petitions was filed by the same set of petitioners against the same set of respondents seeking different reliefs under each petition. 2. In Writ Petition No. 19826 of 1999 the petitioners sought for the relief in the form of issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal ('the tribunal' for brevity) dated 30-3-1999 in O.A.Nos.23269 and 23270 of 1990 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and to direct the respondents to fix their seniority as per the judgment dated 15-7-1986 in R.P. Nos. 1353/ 84, 1878/84 and 269/85 and to direct review of promotions. 3. Writ Petition No. 19827 of 1999 was filed for the similar relief in W.P. No. 19826 of 1999 against the order of the Tribunal dated 30-3-1999 in O.A.No. 3249 of 1993. 4. W.P. No. 19828 of 1999 was filed for the similar relief in W.P. No. 19826 of 1999 against the order of the Tribunal dated 30-3-1999 passed in O.A. No. 4...
Guduri Kotaiah and Company and ors. Vs. Indian Tobacco Traders and ors ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALD540
ORDERBilal Nazki, J. 1. These Civil Revision Petitions came before us on a reference made by a learned single Judge of this Court who found that the judgment of this Court in D. Kyathappa v. K.L. Siddaramappa, 2002 (6) ALD 834, is contrary to another judgment of this Court in CRP No. 3491 of 2002, dated 11.10.2002. Both these judgments relate to the amendment carried out to Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code'), which became effective from 1.7.2002. The maintainability of a revision was the question before the learned single Judge. A learned single Judge of this Court in CRP No. 3491 of 2002 held that Section 115 of the Code applies to the suits as well as to the proceedings including interlocutory proceedings, if an order passed in the interlocutory application had become final, whereas the other learned single Judge in D. Kyathappa v. K.L. Siddaramappa (supra) held that finality as contemplated under the amended provision should relate to the main suit, bu...
Ahmed MohiuddIn Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALD738; 2003(4)ALT247
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. The parties herein have pursued a long drawn and tortuous litigative saga in respect of disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner's conduct while working as a Manager in Kamalanagar Branch (Karnataka State) of the respondent-Bank - the State Bank of Hyderabad.2. The petitioner initially joined service in the respondent-bank as a clerk in 1963. He was promoted to the category of Officer Grade II and thereafter as Manager in the years 1973 and 1975, respectively. As Manager he was transferred to Kamalanagar Branch and joined duty in the Branch in July, 1975. He was relieved on 16-9-1976 to undergo training at Trivandrum. On the basis of a complaint dated 17-9-1976, from a customer of the Bank at Kamalanagar Branch, by the letter dated 5-10-1976 the petitioner was called upon to show-cause and submit his comments on the complaint dated 17-9-1976. He was also placed under suspension by the order dated 9-10-1976. A charge-sheet was issued to him by the proceed...
Chandra Shipping and Trading Services and anr. Vs. Beerapalli Chenchu ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALD572; [2004]55SCL501(AP)
Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J. 1. All these three matters arise out of interim orders passed in O.S. No. 4 of 2003 on the file of IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kakinada. These three matters are being disposed of by a common order. The parties will be referred to in the course of this order as they are arrayed in the civil suit. 2. Necessary facts for the disposal of these three matters are as follows: Plaintiffs land 2 and defendants 2 and 3 are partners of first defendant-partnership firm. There is a written partnership deed dated 1.4.1997. Clause 15 of the partnership deed provides that in the event of disputes, the matter shall be referred to a single Arbitrator whose decision shall be binding on all the parties. Clause 12 of the partnership deed stipulates that death, retirement or insolvency of any of the parties shall not dissolve the business of the firm and the remaining parties shall carry on the business. Clause 13 stipulates that retiring party shall give three months...
Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C. Vs. Kathavath Gopal and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: AIR2004AP51; 2003(5)ALD198
T. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The Managing Director and the Depot Manager, Zaheerabad Depot of the Andhra Pradesh State Transport Corporation ('the Corporation' for brevity) the appellants herein assail the award dated 21.7.1997 passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nizamabad, in O.P.No. 366 of 1996. The injured claimant is the respondent herein who filed his Cross-Objections claiming more compensation.2. The claimant being a minor at the relevant time, through his father and guardian preferred the claim for an amount of Rs. 3 lakhs for the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Corporation bus. It is averred inter alia in the petition that the injured claimant who was aged about 15 years working as labourer and earned Rs. 3,000/- per month met with an accident on 6.6.1995 at about 2.00 p.m. when he was going on foot on the road towards his left at the place of the accident. On account of the ra...
Hal Employees Limited Society and ors. Vs. Talari Venkataiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)ALD318
B. Prakash Rao, J. 1. These two appeals are being filed against the common orders passed in I.A. No. 521 of 1999 in O.S. No. 201 of 1999, and in I.A. 2038 of 1999 in O.S. No. 584 of 1999, dated 21.7.2000 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy at Hyderabad. 2. Heard both sides.3. These two applications are filed by both sides respectively seeking injunction against others from interfering with the possession over the suit scheduled lands. The main claim of the appellants in the suit filed seeking perpetual injunction is that they are the purchasers of the subject-matter of the suit from the respondents herein who are the protected tenants. The respondents also filed separate similar suit and sought temporary injunction in the application filed by them claiming possession. 4. Briefly, the facts are that one V.V. Prakash Reddy was a protected tenant and the respondents are his successors. There is no dispute about the tenancy and issuance of the protected tenancy ...
Baddi Reddy Appanna Dora Vs. Atchamamba Korpu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: AIR2003AP368; 2003(6)ALD165; 2003(4)ALT367
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J. 1. The petitioner and respondents Nos. 2 to 6 herein were candidates for election to the No. 39, Boorugupudi Assembly Constituency in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The poll was held on 11-9-1999. Of the seven contestants in the fray, the petitioner representing the Congress Party and the 1st respondent representing the Telugu Desam Party were the principal contestants. 2. The poll was conducted by the conventional process i.e., by ballots. The counting took place on 6-10-1999 and the results declared on 7-10-1999. The 1st respondent polled 49,930 votes as against 47,955 votes polled by the petitioner, and was declared elected. The other candidates (respondents Nos. 3 to 6) secured a small number of votes each. 3. Having lost the electoral contest to the 1st respondent and by a margin of 1975 votes, the petitioner contests the election by way of this Election Petition. The petitioner asserts that 'as many as 5127 votes were rejected due to the ballot adopted by the...
Kotha Raghavender Goud Vs. Prohibition and Excise Superintendent and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(6)ALD250; 2003(6)ALT149
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. In this writ petition, the proceedings dated 24-12-2002, issued by the 1st respondent, in the name of the petitioner's father, who died a year ago, demanding an amount of Rs. 16,64,896-60 ps. as excise arrears of 1988-89, is assailed.2. According to the petitioner, his father was the highest bidder for Arrack and Toddy Shop at Malakpet for the excise year 1988-89. On the ground that his father is in excise arrears in an amount of Rs. 16,64,896-60/-ps., the 1st respondent issued the impugned proceedings to the petitioner to pay the said amount by availing the One Time Settlement, as evolved by the Government in G.O. Ms. No. 320, Rev.(Ex.II) Department, dated 10-6-2002, waiving interest on the arrears, and in default, coercive steps would be taken to recover the arrears under the A.P. Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 (for short 'the Revenue Recovery Act'). The petitioner assails these proceedings on the ground that he is not liable to pay the arrears of his late father a...
B. Anil Kumar and ors. Vs. Sriram Chits Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: May-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(6)ALD788
ORDERB. Seshasayana Reddy, J. 1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 2-8-2002 passed in IA No. 935 of 2002 in IA No. 870 of 2002 in OS No. 12 of 2002 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Eluru, whereby the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge dismissed the application of the petitioners filed under Order 21 Rule 29 CPC seeking stay of the execution of decree passed in OS No. 12 of 2002.2. The petitioners herein are the defendants in OS No. 12 of 2002. The respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 5,01,243/- and the said suit came to be decreed on 14-6-2002 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Eluru. Subsequently, the plaintiff got the decree transferred to the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, for execution on transfer of the decree, the plaintiff-decree holder filed E.P. No. 123 of 2002 in the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, seeking attachment a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »