Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
D.R. Venkatesh, Vs. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employee ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: (2004)IIILLJ952AP
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is a Managing Director of M/s. SOM Phyto Pharma India Limited. He filed the writ petition challenging the order dated 18.12.2003 issued by the second respondent directing the petitioner to appear before the second respondent on 05.01.2004 to show cause as to why the petitioner should not be committed to civil prison in execution of the certificate issued by the authorised officer of the first respondent under Section 8C(2) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (the Act, for brevity). This Court while admitting the writ petition on 08.01.2004 also passed interim orders in W.P.M.P. No. 631 of 2004 suspending the impugned letter/order of the second respondent. When the application moved by the respondents being W.V.M.P. No. 1743 of 2004 was listed before this Court, with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the matter was finally heard and this order shall dispose of the writ petition.2. M/s. SOM ...
G.K. Devarajulu Naidu Vs. State of A.P. Represented by Public Prosecut ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)224; 2004CriLJ4571
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Praveen Kumar, Counsel representing the appellant/A-1 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. Accused 1 and 2 in S.C. No. 130/97 on the file of Sessions Judge, Chittoor were charged with the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. r/w. Section 34 I.P.C. and A-1 was charged with the offence under Section 498A I.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge on appreciation of the evidence of PW-1 to PW-15 and Exs. P-1 to P-23 and Ex. D-1 and M.Os. 1 to 9 ultimately came to the conclusion that the accused are entitled to be acquitted as far as the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. r/w. Section 34 I.P.C. is concerned, but however the appellant/A-1 was found guilty for the offence under Section 498A and was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of two years and also pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to suffer R.I. for four months. Aggrieved by the same, the present Appeal is filed.3. Sri Praveen Kumar, the learned Counsel representing the appellant/A-1 woul...
The State of A.P., Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ALD(Cri)795
P.S. Narayana, J.1. These two appeals are filed one by the State questioning the acquittal recorded under section 307 IPC, and another by the accused questioning the conviction and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'I.P.C.'). 2. Inasmuch as, the appeal by the accused is against imposition of fine in Crl. A. No. 121 of 1996 filed on the file of Court of Sessions, East Godavari, and inasmuch as, the State preferred an appeal against judgment of acquittal dated 14-6-1996 relating to Section 307 I.P.C. as against the same judgment the said appeal was also transferred and numbered as Crl. A. No. 1614 of 2000 on the file of this Court.3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the evidence available on record is clear and categorical to attract the ingredients of Section 307 I.P.C. and hence the acquittal recorded in this regard cannot be sustained. The learned Counsel had taken this Court t...
Mohd. Khaja Pasha, S/O Mohd. Buruddin, P.S. Serilingampally, R.R. Dist ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)ALT439
Devinder Gupta, C.J. 1. The first and second respondents are the writ petitioners. The appellant was arrayed as respondent No.3. Respondents 3 and 4 herein are the Station House Officer, P.S. Chanda Nagar and Sub Inspector of Police, P.S, Serilingampally, respectively and were arrayed as respondents 1 and 2 in the writ petition. Respondent No.5 was arrayed as respondent No.4 in the writ petition.2. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 2nd July, 2004 disposing of the writ petition with direction to the Station House Officer and Sub Inspector of Police (respondent Nos.1 and 2 in the writ petition) not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the property of the writ petitioner bearing No.3-580/1 (Old No.3-31) in Plot Nos.23, 24, 34 and 35 in Survey No.80 situated at Subhash Chandra Bose Nagar Colony, New Hafizpet, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.3. The grievance of the appellant is that he was impleaded as third respondent in the writ petition and without a...
Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Bombay Trading Company (1993) Pvt. L ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)ALT825; 2005(1)ARBLR82(AP)
Devinder Gupta, C.J. 1. This is an application filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as 'Act') seeking appointment of an arbitral tribunal and for reference of disputes as enumerated in the notice sent by the petitioner through its counsel on 7th July, 2003. The facts are not in dispute. I have heard learned counsel for the parties on the maintainability of the present application in this Court.2. Article 8 of the agreement, which is the arbitration clause, reads asunder :'This agreement is written in accordance with the Laws of India and is subject to the jurisdiction of the Courts of India. In the event of any dispute or difference arising out of or relating to this agreement or breach thereof, the parties thereto shall use their best endeavours to settle such disputes or differences. To this effect, they shall consult and negotiate with each other in good faith and understanding their mutual interest to reach a just and equitab...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. Yejjala Ramaswamy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)230; 2004CriLJ4528
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and also Sri Pottigari Sridhar Reddy, learned Counsel, representing the respondent-accused and perused the material available on record. 2. The State, aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused recorded by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Bobbili, in Sessions Case No. 37 of 1996, dated 13-12-1996, had preferred the present appeal. 3. The Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that the evidence of P.W. 1 is well supported by the evidence of P.Ws. 2, 4 and 5 and the Investigating Officer P.Ws. 6 and 7. The version of the prosecution is consistent with the report given by P.W. 1 to the Police, which was marked as Ex. P-1. The medical evidence also corroborates the prosecution version. He also contended that when the accused was charged with Section 450, I.P.C. also apart from 376 I.P.C., the learned Judge had not considered the charge under Section 450, I.P.C. at all. 4. On the contrary, Sri Pottigari Sridhar Redd...
The Inspector R.P.F, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ALD(Cri)556; 2005CriLJ831
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Sri Mohd. Irfan appearing on behalf of accused.2. Criminal Appeal No. 1469 of 1997 is preferred by the State as against the judgment dated 21-4-1995 in C.C. No. 202 of 1992 on the file of XIII Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways at Secunderabad. 3. Criminal Appeal No. 1470 of 1997 is preferred by the Inspector, RPF, Secunderabad, aggrieved by the awarding of sentence of fine only in contravention of Section 3 of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966, (hereinafter for short referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience). 4. The Inspector of RPF, Secunderabad filed a complaint against the accused 1 to 3 under Section 3(a) of the Act stating that on 27-3-1992 he obtained search warrant to search the premises of M/s. Ganga Steels Pvt. Ltd., arrayed as A3. The version of the prosecution is that the complainant and his staff searched the factory in the presence of A1 and seized 159 Brake Blocks-9 Nos...
E. Srisailam and ors. Vs. Ch. Padma Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: 2004(5)ALT560
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Defendants in O.S. No. 1041 of 2003 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, R.R. District filed this appeal under Section 104 read with Order XLIII Rule 1 C.P.C.2. The respondent filed the suit against the appellants for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of Ac. 15.00 of land in survey Nos. 86 and 87 of Kondapur village, Serilingampally mandal. He also filed I.A. No. 2120 of 2003 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. The trial Court granted an ex parte temporary injunction on 26.09.2003. On receiving the notice in the I.A., the appellants filed counter-affidavit. It is their case that they are the owners of the land in Survey No. 80 of Hafizpet village adjoining the lands of the respondent in Kondapur village, and taking advantage of the boundary dispute, the respondent is trying to encroach upon their lands. They filed I.A. No. 2242 of 2003 under Order XXVI Rule 9 C.P.C. for appointment of an Advocate-commissioner to undertake demarcation of t...
Kathulapalli Ramachandraiah Vs. State of A.P. Rep. by Public Prosecuto ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)30
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri C. Praveen Kumar, learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.2. The present appeal is preferred by the appellant aggrieved by the judgment dated 24-11-1997 in S.C. No. 8 of 1996 on the file of the Special Judge for Cases under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989-cum-First Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore.3. The case of the prosecution is that P.W1 is 'Girijan' by caste and she is working as Health Nurse in Sub-Health Centre in Viruvuru village since five months prior to 4-5-1993 and as she could not secure a convenient house in Viruvuru village, she was staying in Pamuru village and daily attending her duties at Viruvuru village. On 04-05-1993 at about 9.00 a.m., P.W.1 boarded a Van at Pamuru village to go to Viruvuru village. The accused, his wife and some others traveled in the same truck. All of them were sitting in the cabin. When the truck was stopped at Viruvuru vi...
G. Lakshmi Narayanamma W/O. G. Krishna Rao Vs. State of A.P. Through S ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)1; I(2006)BC531; [2005]126CompCas203(AP); 2005CriLJ860
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. These petitions are filed to quash the F.I.Rs registered against the petitioners on the basis of complaints given by the UCO Bank (i.e., 2nd respondent in all these petitions) for offences under Section 420, 464 and 468 IPC. Since common questions of fact and law arise in these petitions, they are being disposed of by a common order.2. 2nd respondent (the Bank) filed private complaints against the petitioners alleging that petitioners, who are working in the office of the Accountant General, availed consumer loans by producing salary slips issued by the Salary Disbursing Officer, with copies of irrevocable letter of authority given by them (petitioners/borrowers) authorizing him (Salary Disbursing Officer) to deduct the monthly installment amount to be paid by them to the Bank, directly to the credit of their loan account with the bank, and an undertaking letter of the Disbursing Officer, undertaking to deduct the monthly installments payable by the petitioners fr...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »