Andhra Pradesh Court December 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.
Dr. M. Mohan Babu, S/O Mr. M. Narayanaswamy Naidu Vs. Medasani Ananda ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD120; 2005(2)ALT5
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard both sides.2. This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the docket order dated 13.10.2004 in I.A. No. 921 of 2004 in O.S. No. 357 of 2004 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi, allowing the application filed by the respondent/plaintiff under Order 26, Rule 9 C.P.C. for appointment of an Advocate-Commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit schedule property and to file his report.3. Petitioner is the 4th defendant in O.S. No. 357 of 2004 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge's Court at Tirupathi. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance. The other facts are not required to be mentioned in detail for the purpose of disposal of this revision petition.4. For the purpose of convenience, in this order, parties will be referred to according to their array in the suit.5. The undisputed facts are that on 13.10.2004 the plaintiff filed the suit again...
Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Dmc and anr. Vs. Dwar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD86; 2005(4)ALT524
Elipe Dharma Rao, J.1. The appellants herein who are the unsuccessful defendants have preferred this second appeal questioning the judgment and decree dated 24-3-2004 in AS No. 153 of 2002 on the file of the Court of Additional District Judge, (Fast Track Court) Rajahmundry of East Godavari District confirming the judgment and decree dated 12-2-2001 in OS No. 46 of 1993 on the file of the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry, decreeing the suit for Rs. 80,000-00 together with proportionate costs and subsequent interest @ 12% p.a. thereon from the date of suit till its realization.2. Originally the suit was filed for recovery of Rs. 1,00,000-00 against Defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally being the damages sustained by the plaintiff towards the loss sustained by her in getting the vehicle repaired, as it was damaged in a 'road accident, for subsequent interest and costs of suit.3. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to as plaintiff and defenda...
Satyanarayana Vs. MoizuddIn Khan
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD249
ORDERS.R.K. Prasad, J.1. The tenant has preferred this revision against the order dated 21-1-2003 passed by the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad in R.A.No. 123 of 2001 confirming the order of the Rent Controller in R.C.No. 526 of 1998, dated 31-1-2001 ordering eviction of the petitioner-tenant. The respondent being the landlord has presented the R.C.No. 526 of 1998, seeking eviction of the revision petitioner herein on the grounds of wilful default in payment of rent and subletting the premises to some third party, and requiring the premises for personnal occupation.2. The brief facts, that are necessary in this case are follows:The respondent herein claimed that the petition schedule premises was taken on lease by the revision petitioner from his father by executing a rental deed, dated 1-7-1978, Initially, the rent was stipulated at Rs. 200.00 per month and subsequently, it was enhanced to Rs. 250.00. It is also alleged by the respondent that his father gift...
Penta Urmila and Four ors. Vs. Karukola Kumaraswamy and 35 ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD130; 2005(1)ALT811
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. Respondents 1 to 6 herein along with another person filed a suit being O.S.No.105 of 1988 on the file of the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Palasa, for permanent injunction to restrain defendants 1 to 31, in any manner interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs in respect of agricultural lands comprised in S.Nos.232-2A1/B, 232-2A2/A, 232-1B, 232-2A1/C, 232-2A2/B, 232-1C. The suit was opposed by defendants who were in possession of the land in O.S.No.232/7 which was adjacent to suit schedule lands. The trial Court by judgment dt.31.12.2001 dismissed the suit disbelieving the version of the plaintiffs. Aggrieved by the same, plaintiffs filed regular first appeal being A.S.No.15 of 2002 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Sompet. When the appeal suit was coming up for arguments, plaintiffs/appellants filed I.A.No.87 of 2004 under Order XXVI Rule 9 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to localize the plaint s...
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organis ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALT645; [2005(105)FLR1184]; (2005)IILLJ11AP
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The respondent/writ petitioner herein filed W.P. No.14763 of 2004 seeking Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the second appellant herein in issuing proceedings No.AP/21765/SAO/PTC/ ENF(Recy)/RC.No.19/03/2004/778, dated 23-07-2004, as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and accordingly prayed for a consequential direction to set aside the said proceedings.2. That for whatever reasons, the respondent-company became a sick company and the matter was referred to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (for short 'BIFR') before whom the proceedings are pending in case No.250 of 2000. The respondent-company issued a closure notice on 11-08- 2003 and the same was informed to the second appellant, with which, we are not concerned for the present in this appeal. The respondent-company was served with the notice, dated 01-04-2003, for recovery of the amounts towards the provident fund contributions, to which, the respondent submitted a detailed explanation....
Kunisetti Sambrajyam Vs. Sriram Chenchu Rama Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD581
C.Y. Somayajulu, J. 1. Respondents 1 and 2 instituted the suit seeking specific performance of the agreement of sale executed in their favour by the third respondent in respect of a building within the boundaries mentioned in the schedule appended to the plaint, which hereinafter would be referred to as the suit property. Their case, in brief, is that the suit property was the ancestral property of the third respondent and his father Nageswara Rao and after the death of Nageswara Rao, the widow and daughters of Nageswara Rao i.e., mother and sisters of third respondent, executed a registered relinquishment deed relinquishing their rights in favour of third respondent, who offered to sell the suit property to them for Rs. 74,000/- and received Rs. 15,000/- as earnest money. As per the agreement, the balance sale consideration has to be paid on or before 5-9-1983. Though they are ready and willing to perform their part of the contract, third respondent is trying to evade the contract. He...
Dugaputi Sudhakar Reddy Vs. Avulapati Shankar Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD61; 2005(2)ALT417
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard both sides.2. This revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Atmakur in allowing the LA. No. 106 of 2004 in OS No. 35 of 1995, filed under Order VIII Rule 1-A CPC to receive a list of documents as evidence.3. It was stated in the affidavit filed in support of the said IA that the documents mentioned in the list were in possession of the first defendant and they could not be produced before the Court because the first defendant was no more. The third defendant, while checking the belongings of the first defendant, found the same and hence those documents were being sought to be received at a belated stage.4. Further, the learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contends, firstly, that there is a procedure prescribed under Order VIII Rule 1-A; secondly, if the Court rejects to receive the documents, the same can be a ground in the appeal under Section 105 CPC and hence the Court below erroneously allowed the IA.5. ...
N. Nazeer Ahmed Vs. Executive Engineer, A.P. Housing Board
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD133; 2005(2)ALT1
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. This civil revision petition is directed against the order and decree, dated 20-10-2004, passed by the District Forum at Kurnool, dismissing the IA No.356 of 2004 in CD No.38 of 2004, filed, under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking permission to amend the complaint, as shown in the petition schedule.2. For the purpose of deciding the present civil revision petition, the merits of the case need not be gone into.3. At the threshold itself, I am of the opinion that the present civil revision petition is not maintainable in the light of the language employed under Section 17(b) of the Consumer Protection Act (for brevity 'the Act').4. The provisions of Section 17(b) of the Act are as under:'Section 17. Jurisdiction of the State Commission :-Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the State Commission shall have jurisdiction,-(a) ............(i).............(ii)............. (b) to call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consu...
Adapala Venkata Ranga Rao Vs. Ravella Satyavathi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD410
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. For the sake of convenience the parties would hereinafter be referred to as they are arrayed in the Trial Court.2. Alleging that the husband of the defendant entered into an agreement to sell Acs.2-50 cents out of Acs.4-70 cents in D. No. 169 of Chadalavada Village, within the boundaries mentioned in the schedule appended to the plant (hereinafter referred to as the suit land) for Rs. 20,500/- per acre and received Rs. 36,250/- from him on 14-12-1984 and executed Ex.A1-agreement to sell the suit land in his favour as per the terms of which he has to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs. 15,000/- on or before 30-8-1985, in default, with interest @ 15% per annum from the due date upto the date of payment and though he is always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and pay the balance due, husband of the defendant failed to receive the balance sale consideration and execute a sale deed and had died on 15-8-1985 without executing the sale deed. Pl...
Adakula Malla Reddy Vs. Sub-divisional Forest Officer, (Authorised Off ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD494; 2005(1)ALT690
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The writ petition is filed for writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the order dated 4.10.1996 made in CM A No. 16/94 passed by the District Judge, Warangal confirming the order dated 24.2.1994 made in Office File No. 12/SDM/ 93 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary.2. It is stated that the petitioner is the owner of the lorry bearing No. ADB 4959 and plying the same on hire and eaking out his livelihood. On 9.6.1993, the petitioner instructed his driver to transport grains from Ameenabad to Narsampet. On 10.6.1993, he was informed by his brother-in-law, by name Janardhan Reddy, that the, lorry .was taken under threat by some persons and got it loaded with teak sizes. Thereupon, the petitioner went to Nekkonda by taking one Yamaha Motorcycle from G. Girinadh and had been to the route in search of the lorry. The petitioner noticed the lorry seized by the Forest Officials at Chinna Nagaram Village, and when the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »