Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
V. Mankoji Rao Vs. United Commercial Corporation Rep. by Its Managing ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR1019]; (2005)ILLJ797AP
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This revision is directed against the Judgment in C.M.A.No. 13 of 1992, in the Court of Additional District Judge, Madanapalle, confirming the order in O.P.No. 10 of 1984 rendered by the Principal District Munsif, Madanapalle.2. The petitioner claims that he was employed with the first respondent since 01-11-1968 as an attender. Respondents 2 to 4 and 7 are the partners of the first respondent-firm. After death of second respondent, his legal representatives were brought on record as respondents 8 to 10, and respondents 11 to 14 are the legal representatives of fifth respondent. The petitioner claims that he worked till September 1983 as attender, but was paid salary only up to November 1981. Alleging that he was not paid the salary due to him, he filed O.P.No. 10 of 1984 under Sections 43 and 44(i) and (ii) of Andhra Pradesh Shops and Establishment Act 15 of 1966 (for short 'the Act') with a prayer to direct the respondents to pay arrears of salary, gratu...
S. Janardhan Rangaiah Vs. Jamindari Ramadevi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-2004
Reported in: III(2004)ACC712
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Respondents filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- from the appellant and 3rd respondent for the death of Thrilok Naidu (the deceased), husband of 1st respondent and father of 2nd respondent, alleging that the deceased died due to an accident that occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the appellant when he was travelling in the lorry belonging to the appellant, insured with the 3rd respondent. The appellant remained ex parte before the Tribunal. 3rd respondent filed a counter contesting the claim. In support of their claim, respondents 1 and 2 examined 2 witnesses as PWs.1 and 2 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-4. 3rd respondent examined one witness as R.W-1 and marked Ex.B-1 on its behalf. The Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry of the appellant and that respondents 1 and 2 are entitled to Rs.50,000/- as compensation from the appellant only and exonerated the 3rd respon...
Branch Manager, Andhra Bank Vs. Myneni Prabhavathi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-2004
Reported in: 2004(6)ALD574
V. Eswaraiah, J.1. Heard both the learned Counsel.2. These two appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 21.1.2000 in O.S. No. 48 of 1996 and O.S. No. 140 of 1997 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Eluru. The appellant in A.S. No. 650 of 2000 is the defendant in O.S. No. 48 of 1996 filed by the respondent-plaintiff. The plaintiff filed A.S. No. 3303 of 2004 against the judgment in O.S. No. 48 of 1996 in dismissing the suit filed by her for enhancement of the rents.3. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as arrayed in the suit O.S. No. 48 of 1996.4. The plaintiff is landlady and the defendant is a bank. The plaint schedule property is given on lease for a total period of eight years. After expiry of five years, it is at the option of the parties to continue the lease for further period of three years with effect from 1.6.1978. After expiry of eight years, the lease was renewed for a period of eight years with effect from 1.6.1986 at the enha...
Korru Reddi Kumar Vs. M. Suresh Kumar Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD260
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The first respondent filed O.S. No. 80 of 1996 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle for recovery of Rs. 90,625/- against the Respondents 2, 3 and 4. The suit was decreed on 16-9-1998. Since the Respondents 2, 3 and 4 did not satisfy the decree, the first respondent initiated execution proceedings in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, which in turn were transferred to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Punganur and numbered as E.P. No. 16 of 1999. Certain items of landed property belonging to the fourth respondent were attached. When further steps were in progress, the appellant filed E.A. No. 32 of 2000 under Order XXI, Rule 58 C.P.C.2. The appellant contended that he entered into an agreement of sale with the fourth respondent on 5-8-1998 to purchase Items 8 to 12 of the E.P. schedule, for a consideration of Rs. 40,000/- and an amount of Rs. 35,000/- was already paid. On the strength of this agreement, he claimed that the said items of ...
Lesley Jacob Vs. Indian Council for Cultural Relations (iccr) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD262; 2004(4)ALT148
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. Heard Ms. S. Sethna Baria, Advocate instructing Mr. C.V. Mohan Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajiv Reddy, Advocate instructing Mr. K. Subrahmanya Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, for the 1st respondent. None appears for Respondent Nos. 2 to 9.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by having been superseded to the post of Programme Officer in the 1st respondent establishment and seeks invalidation of the order dated 14-2-2000 whereby the Respondent Nos. 2 to 9, her juniors, were promoted as Programme Officers ignoring her case for such promotion. That the 1st respondent is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India is not in disputation; that Respondent Nos. 2 to 9 are juniors to the petitioner in the category of Assistant Programme Officers or equivalent categories is also not in dispute; that the petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 to 9 are qualified for consideration for promotion to the post of Programme Officers is also not...
Kundurthi Ranganadham and ors. Vs. Puli Ragaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2004
Reported in: AIR2004AP415; 2004(3)ALD629; 2004(4)ALT209
V. Eswaraiah, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by the appellants who seek to assail the judgment and decree dated 21.8.1997 in A.S. No. 37 of 1987 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Kavali.2. For the sake of brevity the parties herein after be referred to as they are arrayed in the Trial Court.3. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of the present appeal may be delineated as follows:4. The first plaintiff and his late father Sayibu are the mortgagors of the plaint schedule land and the first defendant is the mortgagee. First defendant being mortgagee in possession as per the hypothecation arrangement and is appropriating the profits towards interest. The plaint schedule land belongs to the family of the first plaintiff and his late father Kundurthi Sayibu. The suit land is cultivable wet land. Plaintiffs 2 to 5 are the sisters of the first plaintiff. In August, 1966, 5th plaintiff had to be married. As the lands belonging to the family of the plaintiffs had to be re...
Bonthu Venkataramana Vs. Patrevu Samba Murthy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD753; 2004(4)ALT230
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Bonthu Venkataramana, Revision petitioner herein aggrieved by the order made in I.A. No. 632/2003 in O.S. No. 58/90 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram had preferred the present civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The revision petitioner as petitioner/ plaintiff moved an application I.A. No. 632/ 2003 in O.S. No. 58/90 under Order 18, Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter referred to as 'Code' in short, praying for permission to examine the plaintiff as a Witness. The said application was opposed by 3rd respondent by filing a counter in detail arid the learned Senior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram after framing the Points for consideration ultimately allowed the application permitting the petitioner/plaintiff to be examined as a witness on his behalf, but he shall speak only on the aspect of fresh additional issue framed recently by the said Court and not on any other aspect during his chief-examination...
Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams Vs. K. Govindaiah (Died) by Lrs.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALD504; 2004(5)ALT86
Elipe Dharma Rao, J.1. Aggrieved of the judgment and decree dated 13.6.2002 passed in AS.No. 51 of 1997 by the learned in Addl. District Judge, Chittoor, confirming the judgment and decree dated 31.12.1996 passed in O.S. No. 87 of 1992 by the learned Principal District Munsif, Tirupathi, the Plaintiff-TTDevasthanams, Tirupathi, represented by its Executive Officer, preferred this second appeal.2. The suit was filed against one K. Govindaiah, of whom the respondents 2 to 9, herein are legal representatives, for recovery of Rs. 5,540.80 towards arrears of damages for use and occupation of plaintiffs Shop Room No. 217, situated in Sannidhi Street, Tirumala. The case of the plaintiff is that it permitted Mr. K. Govindaiah 'to occupy the said room and to carry on business on a monthly rent of Rs. 100/- for five years from 1.4.1983 to 31.3.1988, but even after expiry of the term, the defendant failed to surrender the suit shop and, therefore, under Section 83(1) of the A.P. Charitabale and H...
Jaswanth Kour and anr. Vs. Rajan Bai and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2004
Reported in: AIR2004AP511; 2004(4)ALD780; 2004(4)ALT541
ORDERDharma Rao Elipe, J.1. This civil revision petition is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The petitioners herein are the plaintiffs, who seek to assail the orders in OSSR No. 3492 of 2003 dated 22-12-2003 on the file of the Court of District Judge, Karimnagar District, rejecting the plaint filed under Section 26 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Order 7, Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, seeking for partition of the plaint schedule properties in three equal parts and allotment of one such share to each of them and delivery of possession of one such shares to the plaintiffs; recovery of an amount of Rs. 40,000-00 from the defendants towards their share of rents on house from the plaint schedule property for one year (i.e., from 1-11-2002 to 31-10-2003) and directing them to pay Court fee under Section 34(1) of A.P. Court Fee and Suit Valuation Act, 1956 on the ground that the suit is filed for partition and one-third share in the suit schedule property ...
Rashtra Dalita Seva Sangham Vs. Collector and District Magistrate Hyde ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD19; 2004(3)ALT488
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two writ petitions arise under similar set of facts, and the relief claimed therein is in relation to the same land. Hence they are disposed of together.2. W.P. No. 3620 of 2003 is filed by Rashtra Dalita Seva Sangam, represented by its President, Muthyala Babu. The writ petition is originally filed against the officials of the Revenue, Urban Land Ceiling and Police Departments. Respondent No. 7, the Industries Department Employees House Building Co-operative Society Ltd., got itself impleaded as Respondent No. 7. 2880 individuals filed common application to get themselves impleaded in the writ petition. Their application was ordered and were impleaded as respondents in this writ petition. Petitioner claims that it has a membership of about 1,300 persons, hailing from weaker sections of the society. In this writ petition, they seek a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the applications of its members to issue patta certificates an...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »