Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Ratakonda Raghu Naidu Vs. Kolla Sivaram Prasad and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)956; II(2004)BC269
K.C. Bhanu, J. 1. The de facto complainant in C.C. No. 546/1998 on the file of XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, filed this appeal, aggrieved by the judgment, dated 10.11.1999, of acquittal of 1st respondent-accused.2. The appellant filed a private complaint under Sections 138, 141 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, 'the Act') alleging that he got acquaintance with the accused through Mr. Satish Kumar. The accused approached him for a loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- for his business needs with a promise to repay the amount on demand within six months. Accordingly, he paid Rs. 1 lakh on 12.1.1997 with interest at 18% per annum. The accused duly executed a promissory note and issued a cheque bearing No. 204675, dated 25.9.1997 drawn on State Bank of India, Yellareddyguda Branch, Hyderabad, for Rs. 1,00,000/-. When the appellant presented the cheque in the bank, it was returned unpaid with an endorsement 'funds insufficient'. Therefore, he got issued a legal notice, date...
Gollapalli Kanakam Vs. Dokala Mutyalu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(6)ALD856
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J. 1. Since these two CRPs are inter-connected, they are being disposed of by a common order.2. CRP No. 3562 of 2002 arises out of the order dated 19-4-2002 allowing EA No. 241 of 2002 in EP No. 76 of 2002 in OS No. 282 of 1990 on the file of the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry, filed under Sections 47 and 151 of CPC and CRP No. 3189 of 2002 arises out of the order of dismissal of EP No. 76 of 2002 in pursuance of the order in EA No. 241 of 2002.3. The facts, which are not in dispute, are, Jala Rama Murthy-brother of the revision petitioner, purchased the E.P. schedule property under a registered sale deed dated 11-9-1978 from Venkatapathi Rao and others. At the time of the said purchase, respondent was in occupation of the E.P. schedule property as tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 280/-. Subsequent to his purchasing the E.P. schedule property Jala Rama Murthy filed RCC No. 3 of 1979 seeking eviction of the respondent from the E.P. schedule prop...
M. Meenakshi and anr. Vs. Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya, Ntpc (R) and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD132
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. In this batch of writ petitions, an interesting question as to the power and jurisdiction of Kendriya Vidyalaya sponsored by National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd., (NTPC), Jyothi Nagar, Ramagundam, to collect different tuition fee from the children of persons who are not employees of NTPC, but employees of other Central Government Organisations and are not posted at NTPC, would arise for consideration in the background facts noticed hereunder.Background facts2. In 1959, Second Central Pay Commission recommended to establish higher secondary schools with a common syllabus and medium of instruction for the benefit of the children of the Central Government Employees who are liable to frequent transfers as well as other floating population. This was done having regard to the difficulty of Central Government Employees in having uniform education for their children owing to differences in syllabus and medium of instruction in different linguistic areas and varying st...
Bairam Mallesham and ors. Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)644; 2004CriLJ860
K.C. Bhanu, J. 1. This statutory appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the Judgment in Sessions Case No. 602 of 1998 on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Karimnagar dated 27-6-2001.2. The trial Court through the judgment under appeal convicted the appellant-accused Nos. 2, 3 and 4 for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code; Sec. 307 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and Section 323 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo of imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months; rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 250/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and rigorous imprisonment for three months each and to pay fine of Rs. 150/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month respectively.3. The Inspector of Police. Peddapalle, laid a ch...
M. Durga Prasad, Spl. Assistant, Syndicate Bank and Etc. Vs. the State ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)545; 2004CriLJ242
Gopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. The learned Special Judge for CBI cases, Visakhapatnam tried eight persons as A1 to A8 in C. C. No. 8/95 and by his judgment dated 19-1-1998, while acquitting A5 and A7, however, found Al, A2, A3, A4, A6, A8 guilty of the alleged offences punishable Under Section 120(B), 465 of IPC and Section 13(1)(d)(ii) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. On his finding that the above accused persons were guilty, the learned Judge awarded the following sentences.2. A-1 was convicted for the offence punishable Under Section 120-B, IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months; for the offence punishable under Section 465, IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years; and for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d)(ii) r/w Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 ...
Gorikepudi Subba Rao Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: I(2004)DMC291
K.C. Bhanu, J1. The sole accused in Sessions Case No. 390/1997 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, R.R. District, is the appellant. The learned Sessions Judge convicted him under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for three months.2. The gravamen of the charge against the accused was that he committed the murder of Venkateshwaramma @ Rajani by throttling her on 28.4.1996 and hung her body to a peg on the wall with a sari.3. The facts of the case in brief are stated as follows. The deceased was the legally wedded wife of P.W. 14. A male child was born during their wedlock. In the month of April, 1996 she took a sum of Rs. 4,500/- from her husband. She told him that she would go to her parents' house and left the house of P.W. 14 along with their son. On 20.4.1996 the accused introduced the deceased and the boy to P.W. 1 as his wife and ...
K. Munidharmanadhaiah Vs. Girijan Co-op. Corporation Ltd. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)ALT578
R. Subhash Reddy, J.1. The petitioner, who is working as Senior Accountant in the Girijan Co-operative Corporation Limited, Tirupathi, has filed this Writ Petition questioning the order passed by the Divisional Manager in Rc.No. 161/2003-B, dated 31-7-2003, transferring him from Tirupthi and allotting him on deputation to Girijan Primary Cooperative Marketing Society, Nellore.2. It is the case of the petitioner that there are separate set of service rules for the employees working in Girijan Co-operative Corporation Limited, Visakhapatnam and that as per Rule 14, the Appointing Authority or an authority superior to him or an Officer Authorised by Appointing Authority is competent to transfer an employee from Girijan Co-operative Corporation to Girijan Co-operative Marketing Society. As such, it is contended that the Divisional Manager is not competent authority to pass the impugned order.3. On request of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Corporation, the matter is adjourn...
Government of A.P., Rep. by Its Principal Secretary, Municipal Admn. a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)ALD257; 2004(2)ALT273
N.V. Ramana, J.1. The respondents in W.P. No. 18876 of 2001, namely, Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary in the Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, the District Collector, Hyderabad, the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, represented by its Commissioner, and the Assistant City Planner, Circle No. V, Town Planning Section, Khairtabad, Hyderabad, have filed this petition praying this Court to condone the delay of 257 days in preferring the review petition seeking review of the orders dated 17-9-2002 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 18876 of 2001.2. The only ground urged by the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration appearing on behalf of the respondents in support of the condone delay petition is that though at the time of disposal of the writ petition it was admitted by the learned Additional Advocate General that the petitioners are owners of the entire extent of 621 Sq. yds. of land, but in the detailed report s...
Nanda Seshikala and ors. Vs. A.P. State Wakf Board and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)ALD796; 2003(5)ALT466
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the notice issued by the 1st respondent in F.No. 1820/ M4/Prot/VZM/2000 dated 29.4.2000 and the order passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings No. 1820/M6/ProtVZM/2000 dated 25.10.2000 and also the notices issued by the 3rd respondent in Rc.No. 72/2001/L dated 27.1.2001 to all the three petitioners in respect of the land in T.S.Nos. 269 and 506 of Vizianagaram Town, covered by Sy.Nos. 45/2 and 46/26 of Cantonment Area of Vizianagaram Town, as illegal and void.2. The facts in brief are that the 1st respondent issued the impugned notices to the petitioners under Section 54(1) of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short 'the Act') on the ground that the petitioners unauthorisedly encroached into the land of Wakf property to the extents indicated in the notices. Challenging the said encroachments, the then Managing Committee of New Mosque, filed three suits in O.S. Nos. 137, 138 and 146 of 1994 on the file of the...
In Re: Moschip Semiconductor Technology Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2003
Reported in: 2003(5)ALD827; [2004]120CompCas108(AP); [2004]50SCL405(AP)
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The petitioner seeks sanction of the scheme of arrangement for amalgamation under Section 394 read with 391(2) of the Companies Act ('the Act' for brevity)2. The petitioner is the transferee company. It was incorporated on 27.7.1999 as NetMos Technology India Private Limited and its name was changed to Moschip Semiconductor Technology Private Limited on 1.6.2000. Subsequently on 24.7.2000 the petitioner company was converted into a public limited company. Its registered office is situate at 8-2-685/1/1, Road No. 12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. The authorised capital of the company was Rs. 26 crores divided into 2.6 crores of equity shares of Rs. 10/- each. The issued, subscribed and paid up capitalof the company is Rs. 23,22,17,700/- comprising of 2,32,21,770 fully paid up equity shares of Rs. 10/- each. Subsequently, by a resolution dated 28.4.2003 the authorised capital of the company wasincreased by Rs. 9 crores thereby raising up the capital to Rs. 35 cror...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »