Andhra Pradesh Court April 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.
K. Ramulu Vs. Returning Officer, 190-kalvakurthi Assembly Constituency ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD857
Devinder Gupta, C.J.1. The grievance of the petitioner is that on 5-4-2004, he was allotted the symbol of 'Bell to be used by him as an independent candidate for the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly Elections for Ward No. 190, Kalvakurthi Assembly Constituency. But abruptly the said, symbol was withdrawn by the first respondent on 7-4-2004 and instead, the symbol of 'aeroplane' was allotted.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after allotment of the Bell Symbol, the petitioner had projected the said symbol before the public as his election symbol and the action of the respondents in substituting the said symbol with that of 'aeroplane' is without opportunity to the petitioner, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. The learned Counsel further Submits that the petitioner had incurred expenditure also for getting the pamphlets and posters printed with the Bell symbol.3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, we find that the Bell sy...
Dasyam Vinaya Bhaskar Vs. Dharma Rao Marthineni and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALD664; 2004(5)ALT574
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The election petitioner seeks declaration that the election of the first respondent from 270-Hanumkonda Assembly Constituency in the State of Andhra Pradesh is void and further to declare the petitioner as having been duly elected.2. The case of the election petitioner is as follows:3. Pursuant to the notification issued by the Election Commission, polling in respect of 270-Hanumkonda Assembly Constituency was conducted on 18.9.1999. As many as 14 candidates contested in the said election. The election petitioner contested as an independent candidate whereas the first respondent contested as a candidate of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP); the second respondent contested as a Congress-I candidate and all others contested in the said election as independent candidates. Counting of votes was commenced on 6.10.1999 and on the morning of 7.10.1999 the result was declared. The petitioner secured 33,146 votes, the second respondent Congress-I candidate secured 38,488 ...
Bandaru Azad Chandra Sekhar Vs. K. Venkata Ramana and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC582; 2006ACJ2146; 2004(4)ALD713; 2004(5)ALT318
B.S.A. Swamy, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed against the order and decree passed by the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal, Guntur in M.V. O.P. No. 35 of 1996, dated 22-11-1999.2. This is yet another case to demonstrate how the members of the legal fraternity and the judicial officers are dealing with motor vehicle accidents claims. There is neither seriousness on the part of the advocates to put forth the case of their clients in the manner required nor the judicial officers are having any urge to do justice to a suffering victim by giving just and reasonable compensation for the injuries sustained by him.3. In this case at the time of the accident the victim was aged about 10 years. He suffered not only a fracture to the bone on the left leg ankle, but the entire muscle was also peeled into pieces. In the result the boy has to undergo trauma in the prolonged treatment both at a hospital in Vijayawada and in NIMS at Hyderabad apart from the money spent by the fathe...
A.P.S.R.T.C. Rep. by Its Managing Director Vs. Koka Meenakshi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALT505
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. In this writ petition, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) obtained a Rule from this Court calling upon the respondents to show cause why a writ in the nature of Certiorari shall not be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution for calling up and quashing the order dated 2-4-1996 made in E.P.No. 279 of 1995 in O.P.No. 113 of 1982 on the file of II Additional Subordinate Judge, Kakinada (now designated as Senior Civil Judge).2. The relevant facts shorn of details, which are relevant for disposal for writ petition, are as under:An extent of Ac.1;84 cts of land in Sy.No. 715/1 of Pithapuram Village was the subject matter of acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') in which an award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer fixing the compensation at Rs. 10/- per square yard and Rs. 97,930/- towards buildings and Rs. 740/- per trees. The claimants being not satisfied with the said award sought reference under ...
Goldstone Engineering Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(124)LC48(AP)
Motilal B. Naik, J.1. Petitioner is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office at Secunderabad. According to the petitioner, the company is carrying on the activity of putting together duty paid manufactured articles into a container like carton, which is popularly known as 'Cable Jointing Kit' by the Department of Communications (DoT) and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL).2. While so, the respondents insisted the petitioner to pay excise duty considering the activity undertaken by the petitioner as to the manufacturing activity. Despite the petitioner bringing it to the notice of the customs authority that the activity is not manufacturing activity, insisted payment of customs duty to the tune of Rs. 4,16,94,031/-, Under compelled circumstances, the petitioner paid the duty under protest.3. The petitioner later moved this Court by way of Writ Petition No. 5048 of 1998 seeking a direction to declare that the respond...
Vanga Buchi Reddy and ors. Vs. Vanga Madhusudhan Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD815; 2004(4)ALT267
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Respondent filed OS No. 96 of 2003 in the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Kalwakurthy, for perpetual injunction restraining the revision petitioners and their men from interfering with the suit land of Ac.2.00 in Sy.No. 12 and the two bore-wells therein and filed IA No. 241 of 2003 therein under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of CPC seeking an ex parte interim injunction during the pendency of the suit restraining the revision petitioners from interfering with his (respondent) possession of suit land and the two bore-wells therein. The Court while granting an ex parte order of interim injunction on 8-7-2003 posted the case to 22-7-2003 for appearance of revision petitioners. After service of notice, revision petitioners filed a petition to advance the said IA.No. 241 of 2003 and so the said IA. was advanced to 21-7-2003 and then was adjourned to 23-7-2003, on which date revision petitioners filed their counter. The Court posted the matter to 25-7-2003 for hearing. From ...
A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by Its Managing Director Vs. N. Krishna Reddy and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC158; 2006ACJ2156; 2004(5)ALT322
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. While travelling in the van bearing No. AP 02 T 1458 belonging to the second respondent and insured with the third respondent, first respondent received injuries as a result of the collision between said van and a bus belonging to the appellant. Alleging that the said accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant, first respondent filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs. 75,000/- from respondents 2, 3 and the appellant. Second respondent chose to remain ex parte both before the tribunal and this Court. Third respondent and the appellant filed counters contesting the claim petition. In support of his case, first respondent examined himself as PW1 and marked Exs A1 to A5. Third respondent did not adduce evidence, either oral or documentary on its behalf. Appellant examined the driver of the bus involved in the accident as RW1 but did not adduce any documentary evidence. Holding that the accide...
Smt. A. Lakshmi Vs. Arjun Associated Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Director a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC289; 2005ACJ704; 2004(4)ALD618; 2004(5)ALT13
B.S.A. Swamy, J.1. The question of law that arises for consideration in this Appeal would be, while computing the compensation payable to the claimant under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act (for short 'the Act'), the contractual benefits that accrued to a person on the happening of a particular event i.e., either retirement or death or in cases of policy after the expiry of period can be deducted on the ground that it amounts to double benefit. 2. The factual matrix of the case is that the deceased A. Sudarshan, husband of the first claimant and father of the other claimants, working as a line man in A.P.S.E.B. and earning a sum of Rs.6,300/- as salary per month. On the fateful day i.e., on 25-06-1996, while he was going from his office on a scooter towards Lingampally near Aluminium Industries, a lorry bearing No.TSL1668 came in the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the scooterist. As a result of this accident, he received grievous injuries and s...
Chairman, A.P. State Electricity Board Vs. Mohd NoruddIn Asrani (Died) ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALD413
Dalava Subrahmanyam, J.1. The above three appeals are filed against the judgment and decree in OS No. 38 of 1969 on the file of I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dated 30-12-1978 in partly decreeing the suit and declaring the title of the plaintiffs to the unreclaimed portion comprised in Survey No. 9/3 of Khairatabad Village and for recovery of possession of the said extent and dismissing rest of the reliefs claimed in the suit.2. Aggrieved against the judgment and decree in OS No. 38 of 1969, the Chairman A.P. State Electricity Board, Hyderabad, who is the second defendant filed CCCA No. 132 of 1979, the plaintiffs filed CCCANo. 209 of 1981 and the State of Andhra Pradesh, who is the first defendant filed CCCA No. 54 of 1985. Since the subject-matter of the property in all the above three appeals are one and the same and all the above appeals are filed against the judgment and decree in OS No. 38 of 1969, the following common judgment is delivered in all these ap...
Ranga Reddy Associates Vs. K. Shapoor Chenai and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALD564
T. Meena Kumari, J. 1. As all the above CCCAs have been filed questioning the judgment and decree dated 3.4.2003 of the learned XIII Additional Chief Judge, CCC (FTC), Hyderabad in OS. No. 69 of 2003 (Old OS No. 1201 of 1995), they have been clubbed together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The appellant in CCCA No. 74 of 2004 is the second defendant in the suit i.e., DBR Mills Employees Union (Reg.No. B-947) affiliated to INTUC Rep. by its General Secretary D. Srinivas. The appellant in CCCA No. 329 of 2003 i.e., M/s. Ranga Reddy Associates rep- by E.P. Ranga Reddy, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, is the third party to the suit and he filed the said CCCA with the leave of this Court obtained on 22.9.2003 in CMP No. 20475 of 2003. However, the plaintiffs filed Review CMPs to review the said order. Those Review Petitions have been listed before us. The appellant in CCCA No. 350 of 2003 i.e., Dewan Bahadur Ramgopal Mills Limited (DBR Mills), 1-2-639, Elechibagauda, Lower Tank ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »