Andhra Pradesh Court October 2005 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.
M.A. Azeem Baig Vs. Chief Executive Officer, A.P. State Wakf Board and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD858
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is Mutawalli of a Mosque in Lalapet area of Guntur. By an order dated 27.7.2005, the first respondent placed the petitioner under suspension under Section 64(5) of the Wakf Act, 1995 (the Act, for brevity) pending the enquiry into certain allegations under Section 64(3) of the Act. The third respondent herein was appointed as Enquiry Officer. The petitioner filed W.P. No. 12753 of 2005 challenging the comprehensive order of suspension and initiation of enquiry. By an order dated 17.6.2005, this Court invalidated the proceedings of the first respondent dated 27.7.2005 on the ground that Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of A.P. State Wakf Board (Wakf Board, for brevity) is not competent to initiate enquiry and place the Mutawalli under suspension. The order of the learned Single Judge was the subject-matter of the writ appeal being W.A.No. 1377 of 2005 at the instance of respondents 1 and 2 herein. This Court, by order dated 29.7.2005 disposed of the wri...
Md. Hyder and ors. Vs. Industrial Tribunal-ii and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD201; 2006(1)ALT578
Ramesh Ranganathan, J.1. The question which arises for consideration in these writ petitions is whether Labour Courts/ Tribunals are required to award reinstatement with full back wages in every case of termination of services of a workman in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act or they have the discretion, for just and valid reasons, to award compensation in lieu of reinstatement with back wages.2. W.P.No. 13419 of 1996 is filed by 13 workmen challenging the award of the Industrial Tribunal II, Hyderabad, in I.D. No. 193 of 1994 dated 30-12-1995, insofar as the workmen were denied reinstatement. Ms/ Bharat Dynamics Ltd., their erstwhile employer, filed W.P.No. 20180 of 1996, questioning the same award of the Tribunal in directing that the workmen be considered when fresh appointments are made in the company and in directing that the workman be paid compensation at Rs. 7,000/- each.3. Since the award of the Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad in I.D.No. 193 of 1994 da...
Potte Ramanna and anr. Vs. Mukka Rajanna and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD162
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. Second Appeal No. 1062 of 2005 arises out of A.S. No. 85 of 2001 and O.S. No. 43 of 1996. Second Appeal No. 1174 of 2005 arises out of A.S. No. 84 of 2001 and O.S. No. 163 of 1996. The defendants are appellants. As the plaintiffs and appellants are one and the same and the trial Court as well as appellate Court disposed of the matter by common judgment, it is expedient to dispose of both these appeals by common order. The parties are referred to by their status in suit.2. One Boya Madanna @ Potte Madanna was owner of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.5.00 in Survey No. 506 of Atmakur Village in Anantapur District. He was also in occupation of assigned land admeasuring Acs.4.80 in Survey No. 454-2 of the same village. He died on 6-4-1991. After his death, one Akkamma and her elder son Mukka Rajanna filed O.S. No. 43 of 1996 for permanent injunction restraining defendants Potte Ramanna and Kamakka from interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of land in Su...
Shaik Kareem Vs. Mohd. Khursheed Ali
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD857; 2006(1)ALT109
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri Ali Farooq, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri P. Siva Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.2. Initially this case was posted along with other cases on a reference made to the Division Bench of the question as to whether the time prescribed under Order VIII Rule 1 of CPC is mandatory. However, subsequently the same was deleted and directed to be posted separately.3. The petitioner herein, who is the defendant in the Court below, seeks to assail the order dated 12-10-2004 in I.A. No. 743 of 2004 in O.S. No. 5506 of 2003 on the file of IX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad by way of Revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India dismissing an application filed under Order IX Rule 7 of CPC seeking to set aside the ex parte order dated 3-8-2004.4. The case of the petitioner, briefly, stated is that on 20-7-2004 at the request of his counsel, the matter was adjourned to 3-8...
immadisetti Mallikarjuna Rao and anr. Vs. Gostu Pramelamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT241
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Against the order of dismissal of the petition for eviction of the revision petitioner from the building belonging to the respondent, filed under the provisions of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (the Act), respondent filed a petition to receive certain documents as additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C., which was allowed by the Appellate Authority by the order under revision. Hence, this revision petition by the tenant.2. Relying on Eureka Estates Private Limited v. A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad and Ors. : AIR2005AP118 (D.B.) the contention of counsel for the petitioners is that the provisions of C.P.C. do not apply to the proceedings under the Act, and even assuming that an application under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C. can be entertained by him, the appellate authority was in error in straightaway allowing the petition for receiving additional evidence even without going into the questio...
Yellapu Veerraju (Died) Per L.Rs. Vs. Beesetti Peda Appalaraju (Died) ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT402
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Introductory episode: It is not in serious controversy that if the status of the deceased original plaintiff in both the suits as daughter of Vegi Veeramma and Kondamma to be disbelieved and if Ex.A-3 and Ex.B-2, the Wills said to have been executed by the said Vegi Veeramma under which the deceased plaintiff and the deceased 1st defendant claimed properties to be disbelieved, then the position would be that neither the deceased plaintiff nor the defendants would be the heirs to succeed to the estate of the deceased Vegi Veeramma by intestate succession. It is peculiar that the defendants in these suits deny the very relationship of Veerraju, the plaintiff in these suits with Vegi Veeramma. In view of the death of the 1st defendant the legal representatives were brought on record. Equally the appellant/ plaintiff being no more, appellants 2 to 9 were brought on record as the legal representatives of the deceased appellant/plaintiff in both the Appeals. In view of th...
Boya Palappa Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT540
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. This case is coming up before us on a reference made by a learned single Judge Sri Justice M.H.S. Ansari as per the order dated 13-8-1996 on the question as to the jurisdiction of the Vacation Civil Judge to entertain petitions under the A.P. Tenancy Act and the further question whether the orders passed by the Vacation Civil Judge could have been set aside by the District Judge in appeal under Section 16(2) of the A.P. Tenancy Act when an appeal would lie only to the High Court.2. The facts, which are necessary for disposal of this Revision, are that the main Revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to assail the orders passed by the learned District Judge, Ananthapur in I.A.No. 174 of 1,996 in A.T.A.No. 1 of 1996. The petitioned and the respondents 5 and 6 filed a petition under Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act. Along with the said petition, an interlocutory application was filed for grant of exparte ...
K. Venkat Reddy Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD29
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Mandal Revenue Officer (4th respondent) assigned Ac. 1.70 cents in S.No. 306/1 and Ac.0.47 cents in S.No. 308/ 4 of Nellapalli Village, Gangadharanellore Mandal under a patta to the petitioner on the basis that he has been in possession of the said land from a long time. Questioning the said assignment, on the ground that the land assigned to the petitioner is a tank bed, E. Karipi Reddy (5th respondent), who died during the pendency of the petition and whose legal representatives are brought on record as respondents 6 to 8, filed an appeal to the Revenue Divisional Officer, which was dismissed on 25-5-1990. Aggrieved by that dismissal, 5th respondent preferred a further appeal to the Joint Collector, Chittoor, relying on G.O. Ms. No. 157 Rev.(M) dated 13-2-1987 which prohibits assignment of tank bed lands and also on the ground that the wife of the petitioner was earlier assigned Ac.2.28 cents in S.No. 40/2 and Ac.0.17 cents in S.No. 74/2. That appeal was al...
Spl. Dy. Collector (Land Acquisition), Telugu Ganga Project Unit-i Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD252
B. Prakash Rao, J.1. These two appeals are being taken up together having regard to the common points arising for consideration.2. The appellant in these two appeals is the Land Acquisition Officer, namely, Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Telugu Ganga Project, Unit-I, Cuddapah, who seek to assail the judgment and decree in O.P.Nos. 438 of 2001 and 851 of 1999 both dated 25-2-2002 on the file of the District Judge, Cuddapah enhancing the compensation at the instance of the respondents/claimants under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The respondents/claimants have also filed their cross-objections seeking further enhancement at the rate of Rs. 40,000/- per acre for the land.3. Heard the Government Pleader attached to the learned Advocate-General and Sri P. Venugopal, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-claimants.4. Few facts, which are necessary for disposal of these two appeals are that in A.S.No. 1288 of 2002 arising out of O.P. No. 438 of 2...
Dr. D. Vidyasagara Chary Vs. Osmania University and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD780
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner challenges the action of the respondents in not appointing him as Academic Consultant, on a consolidated pay, as was done earlier.2. The petitioner is a Post Graduate in Geology. Through proceedings dated 2.9.2002, he was initially engaged for teaching, for a period of one year, in the University College of Science, Department of Geology. He was required to take 4 theory classes and 10 practical classes. The same arrangement was continued up to 31.12.2004. However, for the subsequent period, the University engaged him as Academic Consultant, by requiring him to take 2 theory classes and 8 practical classes. The petitioner submits that the respondents have split the existing work and engaged many such persons, and that the same has resulted in reduction of remuneration.3. The respondents filed a counter-affidavit, narrating the circumstances, under which the petitioner came to be assigned the work, as indicated above. It is represented that t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »