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.
Duda Raju Vs. Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD23; 2004(2)ALT806
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. The matter is listed for orders of this Court as to the maintainability of the writ petition. The petitioner filed this writ petition, which is at the stage of SR, for issuance of the following relief;To issue a writ, order or directions, more particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 8 of 1998 on the file of the Court of the IV Additional District Munsif, Visakhapatnam (now known as IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam) as being wholly without jurisdiction, illegal and violative of A.P. Slum Improvement (Acquisition of Land) Act, 1956 and falling within the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Surya Devi Rai v. Ramchander Rai, : AIR2003SC3044 .2. The facts of the case may briefly be noted, and they run as thus:3. The petitioner is inhabitant of a slum known as Velampeta Slum, falling within the jurisdiction of Viskahapatnam Municipal Corporation (for short th...
A.P. State Financial Corporation Vs. Paida Jogaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2004
Reported in: AIR2004AP297; 2004(3)ALD270; [2004]55SCL697(AP)
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This Transfer C.M.P. is filed by the A.P. State Financial Corporation, seeking transfer of O.S. No. 56 of 2003 on the file of the Agent to the Government; and District Collector, Khammam, Respondent No. 3; to the Court of District Judge, Khammam.2. The 1st respondent obtained loan from the petitioner for the purpose of establishing rice mill at Bandarugudem Village of Khammam District. On the ground that the 1st respondent did not repay the loan, petitioner exercised its rights under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and claims to have effected the sale of the rice mill in favour of the 2nd respondent, on the basis of a tender, opened on 16-1-2003. The 1st respondent filed O.S. No. 56 of 2003, before the 3rd respondent, claiming the relief of declaration of his title; restoration of the possession of the rice mill, recovery of a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs, towards damages, and for grant of a perpetual inju...
Putur Nanemma Vs. Jilakara Gundaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD639; 2004(4)ALT122
Elipe Dharma Rao, J.1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 20-8-2001 in A.S. No. 11 of 1998 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Rajampet, dismissing the appeal as also the suit of the plaintiff.2. The plaintiff filed the suit O.S. No. 12 of 1995 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Rajampet for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment over the suit schedule property. It is the case of the plaintiff that she is a landless poor person and on the application, the Revenue authorities assigned the suit schedule property and granted D.K.T. patta after following the procedure laid down in A.P. Board Standing Orders. She invested about Rs. 20,000/- and developed the land and cultivating the same. She also installed a bore well and electric motor by spending about Rs. 70,000/-. The defendants highhandedly burnt the thorny fencing laid around the suit schedule property and causing obst...
Katta Annaji Rao, S/O. Venkatreddy Vs. Nemani Krishnaraju Sekhar and t ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALT491; IV(2004)BC160; 2004CriLJ2911
C.V. Ramulu, J. 1. This appeal is filed against the Judgment dated 27-3-1998 in C.C. No. 118 of 1996 on the file of the IV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada, wherein the respondent-accused was acquitted under Section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,1881 (for short 'the Act') .2. The case of the complainant, in brief, is as under:On 15-11-1994, the respondent-accused borrowed an amount of Rs.75,000/- from the complainant-P.W.1 for the purpose of investment in his business and executed a promissory note (original of Ex.P1). On demand, the respondent-accused gave a cheque bearing No.846763, dated 22-8-1995 (Ex.P2) for Rs. 50,000/- drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad, APSP Quarters, Kakianda towards part payment of the amount due under Ex.P1.P.W.1 presented Ex.P2 for encashment through Andhra Bank, Srinagar Branch, Kakinada on 22-1-1996. The same was returned as dishonoured for want of sufficient fu...
Chanumuri Subhaveni and ors. Vs. Sappa Srinivasa Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALD745; 2004(5)ALT255
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Sappa Srinivas, as minor represented by next friend Randhi Ayyanna, the maternal grandfather, instituted the suit for partition as indigent person i.e., O.P. No. 59/92 which was numbered as O.S. No. 78/94 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Tadepallegudem. The said minor was declared as major and next friend was discharged as per order in IA No. 593/ 2000 dated 19/7/2000. On the respective pleadings of the parties, issues were settled and PW-1 - next friend, PW-2 -Buddala Ramanna, PW-3 - the plaintiff, were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-9 were marked. Likewise, DW-1 to DW-10 were examined and Exs.B-1 to B-10 were marked. The Court of first instance granted a preliminary decree for partition holding that the alienations are not binding on the shares of the plaintiff and the 3rd defendant on 11-9-2000. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree the alienees/Defendants 4 to 9 preferred A.S. No. 111/2001 on the file of I Additional District Judge, West Godavari, Eluru and the...
Ediga Jagannadha Gowd and ors. Etc. Vs. the State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD(Cri)963; 2004(2)ALD(Cri)241; 2004CriLJ4052
B. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. These two Criminal Appeals are directed against the judgment dated 21-1-2002 passed in S.C. No. 53 of 2000 on the file of IV Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted A-1-Ediga Jagannadha Gowd, A-3-Ediga Venkateswara Gowd, A-4-Ediga Sivasankara Gowd, A-5-Ediga Anjaneya Gowd and A-6-Ediga Nageswara Gowd for the offences punishable under Sections-302 read with 149 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to suffer imprisonment for life and further convicted A-1 for the offence under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. However, the learned Additional Sessions Judge found A-2-Ediga Saibaba Gowd, A-7-Ediga Narashimha Gowd, A-8-Ediga Maddileti Gowd, A-9-Vadde Madduleti, A-10-Vadde Thimmanna alias Thimmulu, A-11-Vadde Venkateswarly, A-12-Shalanna alias Vadde Shalanna, A-13 Vadee Ramudu, A-14-Madiga Sekhar, A-15-Madiga Karunakar, A-16 Mad...
Government of A.P. and ors. Vs. Pallava Granite Industries (India) Pri ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ALD684; 2004(2)ALT704
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. This batch of writ appeals and writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment since the subject-matter that arises for consideration in all of them is interconnected. The writ appeals themselves were preferred by the State Government as well as the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation against the common order dated 28-3-2002 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court whereunder and whereby the learned Single Judge having allowed the writ petitions issued certain directions by which the appellants are aggrieved.2. The controversy centres around the Government's decision in reserving an extent of Acs.61-50 cents of land in Survey No. 55/5 in Rajupalem Lakshmipuram Village in Chimakurthi Mandal, Prakasham District, for undertaking mining operations by Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation (for short 'APMDC'). This land contains galaxy granite and is suitable for mining operations. The galaxy granite derivable from these lands is...
A. Krishna and anr. Vs. A. Arjun Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2004
Reported in: AIR2004AP502; 2004(3)ALD34; 2004(2)ALT757; III(2004)BC525
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. Aggrieved by the order dated 17-4-2003, passed by the II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, in O.S.No.26 of 2002, holding that the document dated 3-6-1977, which is sought to be introduced in evidence, as not admissible and consequently refusing to receive and mark the same, the petitioners who are the plaintiffs filed this C.R.P.2. A perusal of the order and other material on record, would disclose that the plaintiffs filed suit O.S. No. 26 of 2002 against the defendants for partition of the suit schedule properly. According to the plaintiffs, Defendant No. 1 and the plaintiffs are sons of one late Sattaiah. Defendant No. 2 is the wife of Defendant No. 1. According to the plaintiffs, their father is the absolute owner and possessor of the suit schedule property and when he failed to pay arrears of rentals in excise business, the Government auctioned the suit properties. Initially, the said property was purchased by one Tirum...
B. Anusha and ors. Vs. B. Laxmikanth Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD274; 2004(3)ALT721
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. In this CRP, the petitioners are impugning the docket order dated 30-12-2003, passed by District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, in O.S. (SR) No. 9444 of 2003, returning the plaint and directing the petitioners to pay Court fee under Section 34(1) of the A.P. Court Fee and Suit Valuation Act, 1956 (for short 'the Court Fee Act').2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners-plaintiffs submits that inasmuch as the petitioners have filed the suit for partition and separate possession of the properties mentioned in plaint 'A' and 'B' schedule, they are liable to pay Court fee as required under Section 34(2) of the Court Fee Act and merely because defendant No. 1 is living elsewhere on account of strained relations with them, it cannot be said that the properties have lost the joint family property status, and the Court below taking an erroneous view that the properties have lost the joint family property status, directed the...
Kummari Ramulu Vs. Gangaram Penta Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD280; 2004(3)ALT788
Devinder Gupta, C.J.1. The appellant was successful candidate in the election to the post of Sarpanch of Rayapalli-D Village, Zaheerabad Mandal, Medak District. Respondent No. 1, a defeated candidate, filed a petition under the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Election Tribunals in respect of Gram Panchayats, Mandal Parishads and Zilla Parishads) Rules, 1995 (for short 'the Rules') questioning appellant's election. In addition to the challenge to the election of the appellant, Respondent No. 1 also claimed a declaration that he himself has been duly elected and accordingly impleaded Respondents 2, 3 and 4 also as parties to the Election Petition, since the relevant Rules enjoin upon the appellant before the Election Tribunal to implead in his petition all other candidates, who were nominated in elections but had not withdrawn before the polling. Election Petition was set down for trial. After a period of almost two years of the pendency of the petition before the Election Tribunal, an app...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »