Andhra Pradesh Court January 2004 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.
Gold Medal Rep. Sole Proprietor, Mohd Ali Arifi (Died) and ors. Vs. Sm ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-29-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)ALT542
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. Heard Sri V. Venkata Ramana, the learned counsel representing the appellants and Sri Vilas V. Afzulpurkar, the learned Counsel representing the respondent.2. Sri V. Venkata Ramana, the learned Counsel representing the appellants had raised the following substantial questions of law to be decided in the present Second Appeal.a) Whether the action of the respondent - plaintiff in executing a power of attorney in Ex-A1 after institution of the suit on the basis of another power of attorney Ex-A11, would remove the institutional defect in the suit and whether it amounts to only a curable irregularity?b) Whether a suit for eviction of defendants can be instituted without service of notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, particularly when the respondent - plaintiff had earlier issued Ex-A5 suit notice and again issued Ex-A3 under the said provision of law, when Ex-A3 is not served in the required modes of service contemplated under Section 106 of the T...
A.M. Eswara Mudaliar and ors. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Endowments an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-29-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALT594
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. This common order shall dispose of all the Writ Petitions. All the petitioners are lessees of property belonging to Sri Lakshmi Narayana Swamy Temple, Tirupati since 1983. They constructed structures thereon and living there. Second respondent temple initiated action for eviction of petitioners under Section 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions' and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, the Act) by filing original applications being O.A.Nos. 11, 8 and 9 of 2000 respectively. After receiving notices from Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Kurnool, first respondent herein, petitioners filed interlocutory applications based on a news item published in Telugu Newspapers Eenadu and Vaartha dt. 12-11-2003 to the effect that second respondent temple handed over property to third respondent. Their contention was that second respondent is no more lessor and therefore cannot maintain application under Section 83 of the Act. By separate impugned or...
V. Lingamma and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2004
Reported in: AIR2004AP167; 2004(2)ALD119; 2004(3)ALT802
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. The point that falls for adjudication in both the writ petitions is common and they are disposed of by this common order.2. Petitioners claim that one Shaheen Aziz Ahmed was allotted a plot admeasuring Ac.2.30 gts. in Plot No. 10 of erstwhile Jubilee Hills Municipality and from whom the petitioners' father-Mr. V. Malla Reddy purchased the said property on 12-3-1358 Fasli corresponding to the year 1948 and since from the date of purchase he is in continuous possession. When several bogus claims were made with regard to allotments by the erstwhile Nizam Government in Jubilee Hills area, the 1st respondent instituted an enquiry into such claims of allotment and after elaborate enquiry the 1st respondent through his Memo No. 3933/02/64-17 dated 6-12-1967 held that 41 individuals who claim for assignment/allotment were held to be legal and valid, wherein the petitioners' father's vendor is at Sl.No. 15 over an extent of Ac.2.30 gts. in the annexure annexed to the s...
Pandranki Parvathi and ors. Vs. Akula Gangaraju and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ALD261; 2004(1)ALT617
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. These writ appeals and writ petition are being disposed of by a common judgment since the issue involved is one and the same in all these matters.W.A. Nos. 1497 and 1502 of 20032. These two writ appeals are directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 14-8-2003 made in W.P. No. 23288 of 2001. They raise questions relating to the disqualification of some of the members of Mandal Parishad, Yeleswaram Mandal (appellants herein) under Section 153 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (Act 13 of 1994) (for short 'the Act') read with the Andhra Pradesh Conduct of Election of Member (Co-opted) and President/Vice-President of Mandal Parishad and Member (Co-opted) and Chairman/Vice-Chairman of Zilla Parishad Rules, 1994 (for short 'the Rules').3. The elections for Mandal Parishad, Yeleswaram Mandal of East Godavari District were held on 14-7-2001. In all, 19 members were elected from different Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituencies (MPTCs). A...
Nese Sulthan Narayanaswamy, S/O. Late S. Ramakrishnappa Vs. Station Ho ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2004
Reported in: II(2004)DMC19
B. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 28-12-2001 passed in S.C. No.378 of 2001 on the file of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge found accused Nese Sulthan Narayanaswamy guilty for the offence under Section 302 IPC and convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to suffer Imprisonment for life.2. The appellant herein is the sole accused in S.C.No. 378 of 2000. He was put on trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C.3. The prosecution case in brief is:-PW.1 Nese Kamala is daughter and PW.2 Nese Muni Raju is son-in-law respectively of the accused. The accused married Nese Susilamma (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') about twenty years prior to the incident. The deceased has a daughter who is no other than P.W. 1 whose marriage was performed with P.W. 2. On the date of incident P.W .1 and 2 were in the house of ...
Kothalanka Durga Vara Prasad Rao Vs. Datla Chandraiah (Died) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ALD350; 2004(2)ALT313
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. The petitioner herein, who is the plaintiff, seeks to assail by way of revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the proceedings of the Court below dated 3-9-2003 in O.S. No. 52 of 1982 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, ordering for issuance of summons to the Defendant No. 15.2. Heard Sri T.S. Anand, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri S. Surya Prakash Rao, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents herein, who took notice on filing a caveat. At their request, the main revision itself is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission.3. The case of the petitioner is that the suit has been filed comprehensively for declaration, partition and for possession in respect of Schedule-A and B properties, which after regular trial was decreed partly to the extent of Schcdule-A property and dismissing in respect of Schedulc-B properties. As against the said decree, the appeal was filed...
Smt. B. Shiramani and Etc. Etc. Vs. Executive Officer, Grampanchayat M ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: AIR2004AP147; 2004(3)ALD846; 2004(3)ALT365
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. Since common question of law, and issue that arises for consideration in all the writ petitions, it is expedient to dispose of all of them by this common order.2. The petitioners claim to be the owners of properties abutting on either Side of the station road, Medchal, Ranga Reddy District which leads to National Highway No. 5. They assail the orders issued by the Executive Officer of the Medchal Grampanchayat dt. 8-11-2003 ordering removal of encroachment forthwith, failing to do so, necessary action will be initiated for removal of such encroachment to see that road is maintained with a width of 60 feet as was originally earmarked.3. Brief facts, which are necessary for the disposal of these writ petitions, are as follows :When there was a proposal for removing encroachment, all the petitioners earlier approached this Court by filing WP Nos. 18078/2003 and batch, which were disposed of by this Court by its order dt. 28-8-2003 directing the respondents not to...
S. Raju Vs. the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Medical, H ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ALT2
ORDERDevinder Gupta, J. A practising advocate of the High Court in this petition filed as PIL brought to the notice of this Court about the on-going strike by the Junior Doctors working in various Government Hospitals of the State and seeks a direction to declare the strike organised by the 4th respondent-association and its members as illegal and alternatively to direct respondents 1 to 3 to pass appropriate orders prohibiting the continuance of the strike under section 3 of the A.P. Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1971 and to pass such orders as may deem fit and necessary in the circumstances. 2. The petition was taken up for hearing on 8.1.2004. Notice was directed to be issued to respondents. On behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 learned Advocate General took notice and prayed for taking up the case the very next day. Notice was directed to be served upon the Chairperson of the 4th respondent Association intimating that the matter will be taken up by the Court on 9.1.2004. 3. The...
Mohammed Salabath Khan Vs. R. Srinivas Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD119
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri P.V. Narayana Rao, learned Counsel representing the appellant - plaintiff, Sri M. Madhava Reddy, and Sri C. Ramesh Sagar, learned Counsel representing the respective respondents,2. Ground-9 of the Second Appeal reads as hereunder:'The substantial questions of law that arise for consideration in this second appeal are: a. Whether III Additional District Judge is correct and entitled to decide the appeal in A.S. No. 74 of 1999 on merits by dismissing the same on merits when the appellant and his advocate were absent in view of mandatory provisions of Law in explanation to Order 41, Rule 17(1) of CPC?b. Whether III Additional District Judge is justified in deciding the appeal in A.S. No. 74 of 1999 without giving notice to the appellant before deciding A.S. No. 74 of 1999 on merits by dismissing the same on merits when the advocate for appellant filed a Memo dated 20-1-2003 reporting 'No instructions'?c. Whether the Courts below are justified in accepting the...
Osmania University Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD115; 2004(3)ALT760
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The subject-matter of these two writ petitions is common. Hence they are disposed of through a common judgment.2. H.E.H. Nizam, a Dynastic Ruler thought it appropriate to bring about an excellent place of learning and education and had constructed beautiful edifices in a sprawling campus. He named it as Osmania University. It has grownup as an excellent place of learning shortly after it was established. After independence, it was flanked with important institution like the R.R.Labs (now IICT), N.G.R.I., Survey of India C.C.M.B. etc. The priorities of the successive Governments appear to have changed, particularly in the context of maintenance of serene and congenial atmosphere in the educational institutions. It is a different thing that several residential localities have come up all-round the campus. However, in pursuit of its object of earning as much revenue as possible through sale of intoxicants, it started granting licenses to establish Toddy shops and ...