Andhra Pradesh Court October 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.
A.P. Co-operative Societies Employees Union and ors. Vs. Government of ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(6)ALD441; 2004(6)ALT438
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. Introduction In all the writ petitions, except Writ Petition No. 3628 of 2004 the petitioners challenge the provisions of Section 116-C( 1) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short, the Act), insofar as the same imposed condition that the expenditure towards pay and allowances of the employees shall not exceed two per cent of the working capital or thirty per cent of the gross profit, in terms of actuals in a year whichever is less, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India. The petitioners also challenge Rules 28(4)(b) and 36-B of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules, 1964 (for short, the Rules) as ultra vires Section 116-C(1) of the Act. Initially Writ Petition No. 5647 of 2003 filed by the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Employees Union was listed before a Division Bench of this Court which referred the following question to this Full Bench.Whether provisions of Secti...
G. Saibaba and ors. Vs. Commissioner Gadwal Municipality and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(6)ALD484; 2004(6)ALT734
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. All the petitioners in these writ petitions are residents of Gadwal Town. They are aggrieved by the proceedings of the first respondent dated 10.8.1999 whereby and whereunder the allotment of LIG/MIG plots made in favour of the petitioners sometime back were cancelled and a proposal to reauction the plots was mooted. As the background facts and the contentious issues are same, it is expedient to dispose of the writ petitions by this common order.2. With a view to improve infrastructure and facilities and to check migration from rural areas, small and medium towns to bigger towns, the Central Government sponsored Integrated Development of Small and Medium Towns (IDSMT) Scheme in 6th Five year plan in 1979-1980. The Scheme envisages development of land with all facilities fit for construction of houses and also payment of grant by the Central Government. In pursuance thereof, the first respondent Municipality took up IDSMT Scheme in Gadwal Town and invited applicati...
D. Narasimhamurthy and ors. Vs. D. Krishnamurthy Rao (Died) by Lrs.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD75; 2005(1)ALT485
Ghulam Mohammed, J.1. Since these two appeals arise out of the common judgment and the substantial questions of law in the appeals as also the parties are one and the same, they are being disposed of by common judgment.2. For the sake of brevity, the parties are referred as arrayed in O.S. No. 131 of 1991. Appellants in S.A.No.92 of 1997 are the defendants in O.S. No. 131 of 1991 while appellants in S.A. No. 429 of 1997 are Plaintiffs 2 to 4, who are legal representatives of Plaintiff No. 1 in O.S. No. 62 of 1991 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge, Kurnool. In other words, plaintiff in O.S. No. 131 of 1991 is defendant in O.S. No. 62 of 1991 whereas the Defendants in O.S. No. 131 of 1991 are plaintiffs in O.S. No. 62 of 1991.3. O.S. No. 131 of 1991 was filed by the defendant in O.S. No. 62 of 1991 seeking declaration of his title to the house bearing No. 9/1, Kallur Village, Kurnool District whereas O.S. No. 62 of 1991 was filed by Defendants in O.S. No. 131 of 1991 seeking dec...
K. Kantharathnamma Vs. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD84
M. Narayana Reddy, J.1. This judgment, according to law, arises out of a civil miscellaneous second appeal, filed by the sole appellant, against the sole respondent, under Section 287 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, questioning the, validity and legality, of the adjudications made by, and set forth in Para 2, infra.2. Judgment, dated 2-8-1994, of the Court of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, made in MA No. 199 of 1993, of its file, and the Decree of even date, that, followed the same, therein.3. Perused the material papers of Record.4. Arguments were heard of the learned Counsel for both the parties.5. At the very outset, I am of the opinion, that, the brief, material, required, facts and circumstances of the case, and the brief background thereof, but, only, insofar as, the same are, factually and legally, germane, for the purposes of the present judgment, as well as, for better appreciation of the questions involved, and the merits, or, demerits,...
intouch Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd. Rep. by Its Director Vs. Ashwar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD602; 2005(1)ALT244; 2005(1)ARBLR634(AP)
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. M/s. In Touch Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd., represented by its Director, has filed this application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') r/w the Scheme for Appointment of Arbitrators, seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for resolution of the disputes between them and the respondent.2. The applicant claims to have entered into a lease agreement under Lease Deed dated 18-6-2001 with the respondent, namely M/s. Ashwarya Builders, for leasing out their premises on the III Floor of premises bearing No. 8-2-5-2/1 /AG, Road No. 7, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, to the applicant for housing their office, for a period upto 17-7-2004. At the time of entering into lease agreement, the applicant claims to have paid security deposit in an amount of Rs. 8,79,300/- to the respondent, as per the terms and conditions of the Lease Deed, which was refundable at the time of vacating the premises by them.3. While the agreement was in forc...
V. Munikrishnaiah Vs. C. Janakirama Naidu and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)638; 2005CriLJ1093
C.Y. Somayajulu, J. 1. Alleging that the cheque dated 15-3-1994 for Rs. 50,000/- drawn by the first respondent, in his favour, on Arkonam Co-operative Urban Bank Limited, Arkonam, towards part payment of the price payable by him for the chowke trees sold to the first respondent was returned with an endorsement of 'insufficient funds' and that he (first respondent) evaded to receive the statutory notice sent to him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the Act), after knowing the contents therein and failed to pay the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque, appellant filed a private complaint under Section 138 of the Act against the first respondent and examined himself as P. W. 1 and marked Exs. P. 1 to P. 9 on his behalf. First respondent who denied the offence did not examine any witness on his behalf,2. Negativing the contention of the first respondent that there is no proper service of the statutory notice on him, on the basis that appellant failed to establi...
S. Malla Reddy and ors. Vs. Director, Professor G. Rami Reddy Centre f ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD447; 2005(2)ALT560
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The five petitioners herein got registered as candidates during the academic year 1994-1996 for Graduate programme under distance education mode offered by Osmania University, Hyderabad. They are required to pass in all eighteen subjects. However, they could not complete all the eighteen papers. Petitioners 1 and 2 have yet to complete one paper each and Petitioners 3 to 5 have to complete two papers each so as to qualify for the award of Degree by the University. When the University announced B.A. Degree Supplementary Examinations scheduled in October, 2004, an intending candidate has to make an application with late fee on or before 9.8.2004. The petitioners approached first respondent with necessary applications, but first respondent refused to accept the applications for admission to B.A. Degree Supplementary Examinations, as the distance education under Open University system was discontinued. The petitioners contend that the second respondent addressed all t...
S. Ravishankar Vs. Registrar, Sri Venkateswara University and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD829; 2005(2)ALT198
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner assails the proceedings of the second respondent dated 28.9.1998 as well as 4.2.2000 and seeks writ of certiorari to quash the impugned proceedings.2. The petitioner is a student of B.A. Degree course in third respondent college. He joined the course in 1995 and in April, 1998 appeared for III year B.A. final examinations with Registration No. 96162035. The first respondent University did not declare the result of the petitioner. The first respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 18.7.1998 calling upon the petitioner to submit explanation within 10 days as to why action should not be taken against him for indulging in malpractice. It is alleged that Paper-III (History), was found tampered with main answer book and that there is variation in the hand writing in Pages 1 and 2 compared to other pages of answer book and that the pinning of the answer book was not properly done, and that the Examiner suspected that some written material was inserted i...
Kodidasu Venkataramana Murthy and ors. Vs. Bethapu Gangaraju and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD75; 2005(2)ALT206
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This CMSA presents one more illustration, as to what amount of hardship, the plaintiff, in a suit can be made to undergo, after the suit is decreed. The facts of the case speak for themselves.2. The appellants filed OS No. 105 of 1985, in the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Parvathipuram, for the relief of eviction of the second respondent, and recovery of mesne profits. It was pleaded that the second respondent is their tenant, and that he continued in possession of the property, even after termination of the lease. The second respondent contested the suit, and denied the existence of relationship of lessor and lessee. The suit was partly decreed by the Trial Court, through judgment, dated 20-12-1989. The relief of recovery of possession was granted, but the prayer for mense profits was rejected. The first respondent filed A.S. No. 3 of 1990 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Parvathipuram, aggrieved by the decree, in OS No. 105 of 1985. The ap...
Rachaputi Nageswara Rao @ Nagaraju Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: I(2006)DMC410
G. Bikshapathy, J.1. The sole accused Rachaputi Nageswara Rao @ Naga Raju in S.C. No. 40 of 1996 on the file of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Ongole is the appellant. He was tried by the Trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 304-B, I.P.C. He was found guilty of the charge for the offence punishable under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000 in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. Out of Rs. 50,000, a sum of Rs. 45,000 was directed to be paid to P. Ws. 4 and 5 towards the compensation. However, he was acquitted for the charge under Section 304-B, I.P.C.2. The substance of the charge against the accused was that on the intervening night of 4/5 of February, 1993 in the house of the accused, he caused the death of his wife Rachaputi Swarajyalakshmi (hereinafter called the deceased).3. The case of the prosecution as unfolded at the trial is as follows:P.W. 4 is Chapram Rama Moh...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »