Andhra Pradesh Court September 2003 Judgments

V. Nandam Goud Vs. Government of A.P. and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(6)ALD246; 2004(2)ALT336

ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J. 1. This writ petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus declaring the action of second respondent in passing the 'Motion of No Confidence' vide Proceedings dated 27-8-2003, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Section 245(2) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act. 2. The petitioner claims to be the elected President of Mandal Parishad Domkonda Mandal, Nizamabad District and the Mandal Parishad, Domakonda, consists of 14 members. The election to MPTC members was held on 17-7-2001 and the petitioner was declared elected as President of Domakonda Mandal Parishad on 22-7-2001. While so, it is stated that nine members of the Mandal Parishad made a representation to the second respondent for moving 'No Confidence Motion' against the petitioner and subsequently a meeting of the Parishad was convened on 27-8-2003 to consider the 'No Confidence Motion'. The 'No Confidence Motion' was declared to have been passed as nine members out of total members numbering 14 were voted in i...

Uppuluri Satyam Vs. Padala Sundaram and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2004(4)ALD806; 2004(3)ALT799

Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. The defendant in O.S.No. 825 of 1978 on the file a District Munsif, Rajahmundry filed this appeal against judgment and decree dated 23-12-1988 in A.S.No. 60 of 1985 on the file of II Additional District Judge, East Godavari, Rajahmundry confirming the decree and judgment dated 24-6-1985 in the above suit. After the disposal of the appeal by the lower appellate court, it appears that the sole plaintiff died and this appeal is filed against respondents 1 to 4 as legal representatives of sole plaintiff.2. Necessary facts for disposal of this appeal are as follows:The plaintiff is owner of house bearing No. 746 in Kadiam Panchayat. The defendant owns the house to the north of the plaintiff's house and on the north-western direction of the houses of plaintiff and defendant, one Ganesula Satyam has his own house. To the west of plaintiff's house, there is house of Smt. E. Vijayalakshmi. According to the plaintiff, in between those four houses there is a common la...

K. Chandraiah Vs. Special Deputy Collector, L.A. Unit Ii

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2004(5)ALD141; 2004(5)ALT547

B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The claimant in OP No.517 of 1992 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, is the appellant is this appeal preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short 'the Act'.2. In order to consider as to whether the order and decree under appeal suffer from any legal infirmity requiring our interference in the matter, a few relevant facts leading to the filing of the appeal may be noticed.3. The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by Executive Engineer, I&PDCD-2; Lower Manair Dam, sent requisition for acquisition of the land and other structures situated in Hasnapur Village of Karimnagar Taluq for the purpose of submergence under Lower Manair Dam Reservoir. On the said request, the Government proposed to acquire huge extents of land situated in that village which included double crop wet lands, single crop wet lands and dry lands together with structures like houses, wells, tres etc. The draft notification under Section 4(1) of t...

Ponnada Srinivas Vs. Andhra University, Rep. by Its Registrar and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2004(2)ALT116

ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. Since the questions that arise for consideration in both the writ petitions are similar and interconnected, both the petitions are being disposed of by this common order.2. Challenging the proceedings dated 3-4-2003, the present writ petitions have been filed.3. A bare perusal of the impugned proceedings issued by the Vice-Chancellor of the first respondent-University discloses that the petitioner is a student of the respondent-University, and he was involved in an incident of burning the effigy of the Vice-Chancellor in the month of July, 2002. It appears that an enquiry was conducted for the alleged indiscipline in both the writ petitions and, in both the enquiries, it appears that the petitioner was found guilty of violating the basic principles of Discipline, Decency and also Maintenance of Peaceful Atmosphere and Tranquility in the Campus. In this regard, it is not in dispute that because of the enquiry against the petitioner, the petitioner had lost one ac...

Mrs. Vudumula Leelakumari and Others Vs. Dr. M. Ravindra

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. The first complainant is the mother and the complainants 2 and 3 are her children. The first complainant, hereinafter called the deceased consulted the opposite party, hereinafter called the doctor during the first week of August, 1996 for a complaint of bleeding. On the advice of the doctor, she underwent Hysterectomy operation on 10.8.1996. Later on 11.8.1996, the doctor sent the specimen for Biopsy test at Guntur through her husband. M/s. Govardhan Diagnostic Private Limited, Guntur, issued the Biopsy report dated 14.8.1996, which revealed Cervix Invasive, Large cell, Keratinising Squamous Cell Carcinoma. After perusing the report, the doctor informed her that it is a case of cancer and advised her to go to Hyderabad or Bangalore for cancer treatment. Accordingly, the deceased came to Hyderabad and visited M.N.J. Cancer Hospital on 26.8.1996, where Ultra-sonography, X-ray, Cytology and other tests were conducted. She underwent radiation therapy fr...

P. Prasad Vs. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(5)ALD707; 2003(6)ALT799

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is the registered owner of a heavy goods vehicle bearing No. AP04T4334. The vehicle had permit valid up to 22-12-2000 and fitness certificate upto 1-2-2001. Tax was paid for the quarter ending with 31-12-2000. Petitioner contends that the vehicle as well as the records were seized by the Railway Police on 7-9-2000 in connection with an accident. According to him, the vehicle was returned on 25-6-2001 and the records were returned on 27-4-2003. In view of these developments, petitioner claims to have submitted a representation dated 30-5-2003 informing the respondent that the vehicle was not put to use and that it is not liable to be levied tax from 1-1-2001 onwards. The respondent issued Memo dated 13-6-2003 informing the petitioner that since he did not give the intimation of stoppage of plying of the vehicle before the commencement of the next quarter, his request cannot be acceded to and that he is liable to pay the tax in view of Section...

A. Kavitha and anr. Vs. State of A.P. and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(6)ALD370; 2003(6)ALT480

ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. The petitioners seek for issuance of a writ of mandamus with the following reliefs: (a) declaring the amendment carried out to the A.P. Regulation of Admission to Super Specialities in Medical Colleges Rules, 1983, notified through G.O. Ms. No. 409 H&M; and Family Welfare (E.2) Department, dated 24-7-2003, as unconstitutional.(b) consequently direct the respondents or alternatively declare that the notification published through G.O. Ms. No. 409 H&M; and Family Welfare (E.2) Department, dated 24-7-2003, does not have application over all admission process for Super Speciality Medical Courses notified by the 2nd respondent on 3-5-2003 for the academic year 2003-2004.(c) consequently direct the respondents to treat an consider the 8 seats notified in various Super Speciality Medical Courses as 'non-State-wide' seats as it is and fill them up by following the principle of reservation for 85% of the same in favour of the local candidates of the local area in which s...

Madhavarapu Haranadhababa Vs. Kaligineedi Mahalakshmamma (Died) Per L. ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2004(1)ALD416; 2004(1)ALT655

Dubagunta Subrahmanyam, J.1. This appeal is filed against judgment and decree dated 10.03.1992 in A.S. No. 69 of 1985 on the file of 1st Additional Subordinate Judge at Kakinada confirming order and decree dated 11.7.1985 in E.A. No. 879 of 1981 in E.P. No. 491 of 1980 in O.S. No. 594 of 1980 on the file of III Additional District Munsif, Kakinada. During the pendency of this appeal, first respondent died and third respondent was brought on record as legal representative of deceased - first respondent. 2. The appellant is the claimant. The first respondent - plaintiff filed a money suit and obtained a money decree against second respondent. Subsequently she filed an execution petition and attached plaint schedule property on 14.01.1981. The appellant filed a claim application in E.A. No. 879 of 1981 requesting the Executing Court to raise the attachment over plaint schedule property. He pleaded that he purchased the plaint schedule property under an agreement of sale dated 9.4.1979 fro...

Md. Munawar HussaIn Vs. Usha Kiran Chit Funds and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2004AP63; 2003(6)ALD796

ORDERGopala Krishna Tamada, J. 1. This revision is directed against the judgment and decree in Small Cause Suit No. 8 of 1999 dated 26th March, 2002 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sathupalli.2. The suit was one for recovery of money basing on chit agreement for an amount of Rs. 4,000/- and for subsequent interest. On examination of PWs.1 to 3 and getting marked Exs.A-1 to A-13 on behalf of the plaintiffs and on examination of DW-1 on behalf of the defendants, the Court below decreed the suit as prayed for. Against the said judgment and decree, as already referred above, this revision is filed before this Court.3. The main point urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. Kilaru Khader Baba is that the very institution of the suit by the respondents herein is contrary to Rule 32 of the Civil Rules of Practice. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, when once a suit is instituted by the agent on behalf of the principal as contemplated under Rule 32, ...

Uttamchand Sarma Vs. Jasti Chinna Veerabhadra Rao

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2004AP225; III(2004)BC135

ORDERGopalakrishna Tamada, J.1. This revision is directed against the orders passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem in I.A. 263 of 2003 in O.S. No. 62 of 1997 dated 9-4-2003.2. The facts which are necessary to dispose of this case are, that the respondent herein filed a suit for recovery of amounts basing on three promissory notes alleged to have been executed by the petitioner herein on different dates for Rs. 1,00,000/- each. The respondent herein was examined as PW-1 and the others were examined as PWs 2 to 5. When the suit was coming up for defendant's evidence, the defendant i.e. the petitioner herein has come up with this application i.e. I.A. 263 of 2003 for sending up of the promissory notes to an expert to ascertain as to whether the said promissory notes were executed on different dates or were executed on a particular day simultaneously. However, the Court below refused to entertain the said petition and accordingly dismissed it. Hence, this revision.3. Accordi...