Andhra Pradesh Court July 2004 Judgments
M. China Gopalakrishna Vs. the State of A.P. Rep. by Its Deputy Supdt. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2004
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)795; 2004CriLJ3892
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the sole appellant against the conviction and the sentence imposed, through the judgment dated 24-01-1997 in C.C. No. 13 of 1993, by the Special Judge for A.C.B. Cases, Visakhapatnam. 2. The appellant was charge sheeted for the offences under Section 7, 11 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. The case of the prosecution is briefly as follows:The appellant worked as a Mandal Revenue Officer, Mentada Mandal in Vizianagaram District. P.W.1 has got Ac.0.58 cents of land in his village. There were some trees in that land. In order to get permission to cut those trees, he made Ex.P-1 application to the Appellant/M.R.O., Mentada Mandal in October, 1992. He did not receive any communication from him. Therefore, he made Ex.P-3 second application in the same month along with Ex.P-2 certificate issued by the Village Administrative Officer to show that he is the owner of the land and the trees. Some time after the present...
Tag this Judgment!Anumula Raji Reddy Vs. State of A.P., Rep. by Public Prosecutor
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ220
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the accused in SC ST SC No. 11 of 1996 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge under the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity 'the Act'), Medak at Sangareddy. He was convicted for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act read with Section 376 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of ten years and also to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year through the judgment dated 03-09-1997. The appellant preferred this appeal questioning the judgment of the Sessions Court. 2. The factual matrix leading to the conviction of the appellant is as follows:The victim (P.W.1) is a lady belonging to Schedule caste. On 28-9-1994 she went to her maize field situated at the outskirts of her village for getting green grass. The land of the accused is adjacent to the land of P.W.1. At about 9 AM, while P.W.1 was cutt...
Tag this Judgment!V. Dharma Reddy and ors. Vs. S. Hariram
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2004
Reported in: 2004(6)ALT802
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated: 10.7.2001 passed by the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy, Mahaboobnagar District, in I.A. No. 162 of 2001 in O.S. No. 44 of 1996. 2. The respondent filed the suit for the relief of perpetual injunction. According to him, he purchased the suit schedule property from the petitioners through a sale-deed dated: 13.6.1996. The petitioners contended that the respondent is yet to pay part of consideration, and, in that view of the matter, he was not delivered the possession of the suit schedule property. It was in this context, that the respondent intended to rely upon an agreement of sale dated: 23.4.1996 said to have been executed between them. 3. The respondent filed I.A. No. 195 of 2001 calling upon the petitioners herein to produce the agreement of sale dated: 23.4.1996 said to have been executed between them. He pleaded that the original of the agreement of sale was taken by the petitioners at...
Tag this Judgment!The State of A.P., Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Vs. U ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ALD(Cri)437; 2004CriLJ4461
G. Bikshapathy, J.1. The State preferred the appeal assailing the judgment of the learned II Addl. District Judge, Nellore in S.C.NO. 90 of 1995, dated: 6.7.2001.2. The accused was tried by the learned Sessions Judge for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 302 and 201 IPC. However, he was not found guilty of the offence and accordingly he was acquitted by the judgment referred to above. The said judgment is called in question by the State in the present appeal. 3. The case of the prosecution was that accused had discarded his wife about 6 months prior to the date of the incident. The deceased was about 16 years of age and the accused was moving and following the deceased with an intention to satisfy his lust. Both the accused and deceased were the residents of Chavata Bheemavaram village. On 5.5.1994 about 3-30 p.m. the deceased went to fetch grass in the land situated on the western side of the village. The accused who was watching the movements alleged to have stopped the dec...
Tag this Judgment!Kambhampati Srinivasa Rao Vs. Kambhampati Vishnu Vardhana Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)ALD93; 2004(5)ALT216
ORDERT. Meena Kumari, J.1. This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 5-12-2003 passed in an unnumbered I.A. of 2003 in O.S. No.334 of 1999 by the Junior Civil Judge, Gannavaram, Krishna District.2. The above interlocutory application was filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Rule 1, Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, to send the document i.e., Ex A-2 to another Telugu expert.3. It is contended by the petitioner/ plaintiff that earlier he has filed an application before the Court below to refer Ex.A-2 document to an expert for his opinion. Later, the expert after examination of the documents has given his opinion and that the expert in his evidence during cross-examination deposed that he is a native of Maharastra and his mother tongue is Marathi. That he cannot read and write Telugu but he stated in his evidence that while examining the case he identified all the characteristics with the help of guide books a...
Tag this Judgment!Upparapalli Tirumala Rao Vs. the State of A.P. Rep. by Public Prosecut ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ALD(Cri)551; 2004CriLJ4514
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Accused No. 1 in S.C. No. 112/93 preferred the present Criminal Appeal aggrieved by the Judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Khammam convicting him and directing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence under Section 325 I.P.C. Though the appellant/A-1 was convicted under Section 325 I.P.C. and A-2 was convicted under Section 323 I.P.C. inasmuch as A-2 had served the sentence he had not preferred any Appeal. 2. The accused were charged with the offence under Section 302 r/w. section 34 I.P.C. and the learned Sessions Judge after recording oral and documentary evidence and findings ultimately arrived at the conclusion that the said charges were not proved, but convicted A-1 under Section 325 and A-2 under Section 323 I.P.C. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Nageswara Rao and the accused are neighbours and friends. The appellant/A-1 is the br...
Tag this Judgment!Ambem Nadpi Sailoo and ors. Vs. Premlatha Mathi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)ALD278
L. Narasimha Reddy J.1. This appeal against order is filed by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 96 of 2003 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, at Nizamabad, aggrieved by the order dated 4-12-2003, passed in I.A. No. 442 of 2003, in that suit.2. The suit was filed for the relief of declaration of title and consequential injunction, in respect of Ac. 1.30 guntas of land in Sy.No. 2457 of Arsapally Revenue Village, Nizambad District. The claim of the appellants is based on adverse possession. They also filed I.A. No. 442 of 2003, under Order 39, Rule 1 C.P.C., for grant of temporary injunction. Through the order under appeal, the Trial Court dismissed the I.A.3. The appellants contend that late Ambam Yellappa, the father of Appellants 1 and 2, was the tenant in respect of Ac. 17.10 guntas of land, owned by the family of Vishwanath Tulla, in various survey numbers, including Sy.No. 2457. It is their case that late Yellappa filed an application under Section 32 of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Tena...
Tag this Judgment!K.R. Subbaraya Mudaliar Vs. Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)ALD322
B.S.A. Swamy, J.1. This appeal is filed by the respondent-plaintiff against the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 79 of 1999, dated 05.11.2002 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi. The appellant herein is the defendant in that suit. 2. The parties herein are referred to as tenant and Devasthanam for the sake of convenience. 3. The factual matrix of the case is that O.S. No. 122 of 1997 filed by the Devasthanam on the file of the I Additional District Munsif, Tirupathi was transferred to the Court of the Principal Civil Judge and the same was numbered as O.S. No. 79 of 1999. In this suit, the Devasthanam pleaded for recovery of vacant possession of A, B and C-schedule properties from the possession of the tenant and also for payment of arrears of rent and damages, till the date of surrender of possession of A, B and C-scheduled properties to the plaintiff-Devasthanam and for costs. The tenant resisted the suit on the ground that the civil court has no jurisdiction...
Tag this Judgment!S. Rukman Naik Vs. P. Anjani Prabha and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)ALD876
ORDERDharma Rao Elipe, J.1. This Memorandum of Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 and 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondents for violating the directions of this Court in CMP.No. 316 of 2002 in S.A. No. 14 of 2002, dated 14-1-2002 in the interest of justice.2. Before proceeding with the contempt case, for proper appreciation of the factual matrix, respective pleadings of the parties may be relevant.3. Petitioner is the owner and in possession of 729 sq.yards in Plot No. 77/19 of Yamuna Nagar Co-operative Society, Survey No. 102/3 of Hakimpet Village of Shaikpet Revenue Mandal, Hyderabad. In 1992, when the respondents tried to interfere with his peaceful possession over the said plot, he filed O.S. No. 1485 of 1992 on the file of the Court of VII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. As a counterblast, the respondents also filed O.S.No. 1686 of 1992 on the file of the same Court. Hence, both suits were clubbed and tried together. After full-fledged trial...
Tag this Judgment!Hyder Khan and anr. Vs. Zakirunnisa Begum and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)ALD622
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This is an application filed under Section 151 CPC to modify the order passed by this Court in Appl. No. 716 of 2002. Through the order passed in Appl.No. 760 of 2002, this Court directed the District Court, Rangareddy, to deliver possession of Ac.5.02, guntas of land in S.No. 77 of Hafeezpet Village, Serilingampalli Mandal, Rangareddy District to the petitioners. Through the present application, the petitioners seek modification of the same to the effect that the possession be delivered to them through the Receiver/ Commissioner, the second respondent herein, instead of the District Judge, Rangareddy.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Receiver/Commissioner.3. The petitioners claim to be purchasers of Ac.5.02 guntas of land in Survey No. 77 of Hafeezpet Village, Sherilingampally Mandal, Rangareddy District from Smt. Zaheerunnisa Begum, W/o. Mohammad Khan, Defendant No. 94 in CS.No. 14 of 1958 on the file of this Court. They filed Appl.No. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »