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.
D.D. Nirmal Kumar and ors. Vs. G. Sunder Sekhar and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD132; 2005(6)ALT308
ORDERG. Chandraiah, J.1. Heard both the sides.2. Since the issue involved in all the three revisions is connected and the result in C.R.P. No. 2343/2005 depends on the other two revisions, they are being disposed of by this common order.3. Aggrieved by the common order dated 22.12.2004 passed by the Court of Principal District Judge, Kadapa in Check Slip Nos. 1 and 2 of 2004, C.R.P. No. 2343/ 2005 is filed and the other two revisions are filed aggrieved by the order of the Court below in refusing to extend further time for payment of Court fee.4. By the impugned order, the Court below directed the plaintiffs to pay the Court fee separately under Section 24(d) of the A.P. Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') for the relief of declaration of the sale deeds dated 17.1.2004 executed by defendants 3 and 5 in favour of defendants 10 to 16 as null and void and further directed the plaintiffs to pay the Court fees separately for two reliefs under Section 26(c) i.e., f...
Gajjala Shankar Vs. Anuradha
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2005
Reported in: AIR2006AP65; 2005(6)ALD430; 2005(6)ALT565; II(2006)DMC36
D.S.R. Varma, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is directed against the judgment dated 10-5-1996, in O.P.No. 29 of 1993 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Nizamabad, filed under Section 13(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for dissolution of the marriage.2. The case of the appellant-husband is that his marriage with the respondent-wife took place on 16-5-1990 as per the prevailing Hindu customs and rites. According to him, soon after the marriage, his wife started harassing him, both mentally and physically, and threatened him saying that she would commit suicide and hold him responsible for that. She often used to beat him in public. He states that all his efforts to bring change in the attitude of the respondent, turned futile. Subsequently, the respondent left his company, lodged a complaint against him, his parents and sister under Section 498-A I.P.C. which was numbered as C.C.No. 80 of 1992 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Yellareddy, Niza...
Kalyani Venkateswara Rao Vs. Ande Kameswari
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT17
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J. 1. This revision is preferred against the order dated 25-4-2005 directing sale of the property of the revision petitioner in execution of a final decree for sale of the hypotheca, on the following grounds:(1) The Court below failed to see any other mode to recover the decretal amount.(2) The Court below failed to consider the E.P. Schedule amount is not correct even though the petitioner raised in his counter.(3) The Court below ought to have seen that the part of the land should put for sale which is equivalent to decretal amount, but ordered sale of entire property of worth Rs. 10,00,000/-.(4) The Court below failed to consider the plea of the petitioner that he has accepted to pay half of the decretal amount.2. Copy of the proceedings in the E.P. recorded by the executing Court, produced by the petitioner as a material document, shows that on 10-3-2005, the objections of the petitioner for execution of the decree were over ruled, and the E.P. was posted for ...
Chowdri Kalyan Chand and ors. Vs. V.R. Dwarknath and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD583; 2006(1)ALT215
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This is a reference made by a learned single Judge of this Court to give a finding on a question whether a Landlord can maintain a single eviction petition against the tenants of two different portions of a building leased out under two separate lease deeds in the light of Order 1 Rules 3 and 9 and Order 2 Rules 6 and 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'C.P.C.').2. Before delving into the question, we wish to refer to the relevant provisions of C.P.C.3. Order 1 of the C.P.C. deals with parties to a suit. Order 1 Rule 3 reads as follows:3. Who may be joined as defendants:- All persons may be joined in one suit as defendants where-(a) any right to relief in respect of, or arising out of, the same act or transaction or series of acts or transactions is alleged to exist against such persons, whether jointly, severally or in the alternative; and(b) if separate suits were brought against such persons, any common question of law or fact would arise.4. ...
Bonala Raju and anr. Vs. Sarupuru Sreenivasulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD745; 2006(2)ALT202
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. In a suit filed by the respondent for recovery of the amount covered by the promissory note dated 12-6-1996, executed by the appellants in his favour, appellants filed their written statement contending that they did not borrow any amount from the respondent and did not execute the suit promissory note and that is a forged document. It is their case that the 1st appellant worked as a mason under the respondent for some time and since respondent failed to pay the amounts due and payable to him, he stopped attending the works taken up by the respondent and so he must have forged the promissory note to spite him.2. Basing on the pleadings, the trial Court framed the following issues:1. Whether the suit promissory note is fabricated and forged one ?2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit sum as prayed for ?3. To what relief ?3. In support of his case, respondent examined himself as P.W.I and another person, who is said to have been present at the time...
Pragallapati Gangaraju Vs. K. Satyanarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT467
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. The petitioner invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order, dated 16-9-2005, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, in dismissing I.A. No. 1425 of 2005 filed in I.P. No. 31 of 2004, by the petitioner to stay the proceedings of the Official Receiver pending disposal of the application filed by him under Order IX Rule 13 CPC.2. The facts, which are not in dispute, are as under:The vendor of the revision petitioner filed I.P. No. 13 of 2002 before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kowur, showing the suit schedule property as schedule 'A' property and subsequently, he filed a memo, dated 28-7-2004, not pressing the I. P. and therefore, the lower Court dismissed the said I.P. In the meantime, it appears that he transferred the schedule 'A' property in favour of the revision petitioner. Thereafter, respondents 1 to 3/ creditors filed I.P. No. 31 of 2004 before the same Court a...
Andhra Pradesh Ips Association Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: AIR2006AP68; 2005(6)ALD464; 2006(3)ALT53
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. Andhra Pradesh IPS Association, represented by its Hon. Secretary Sri V. Dinesh Reddy, IPS, former Commissioner of City Police, Hyderabad, filed the instant writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus declaring orders of the Government in G.O. Ms. No. 406, General Administration (Poll.A) Department, dated 2.9.2005, as arbitrary, illegal, irrational and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India, and for a consequential direction that the Protocol Manual of the year 1996 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh be followed on all State Ceremonial Occasions and for such other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper. The petitioner has arrayed Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Chief Secretary, and Union of India in Ministry of Home Affairs represented by its Secretary to Government of India, New Delhi as respondents 1 and 2. Sri C.R. Biswal, IAS, Principal Secretary to Government in GAD (Political) Department is second respondent and Dr. Mohan...
Mahesh Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Special Officer and Compe ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD772
ORDERB. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by Mahesh Co-operative Housing Society Limited, represented by its President Sri. G. V. Ramakrishna Rao with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the order dated 2.7.2002 of Commissioner (Appeals)- 2nd respondent in proceedings No. Hyd/46 to 48/92 affirming the order of the Special Officer and Competent Authority, ULC, Hyderabad- 1st respondent dated 25.8.1990 as null and void. A further relief is sought for to direct the 1st respondent to consider the application in Form No. 5 dated 16.9.1976 in accordance with law and assign the land in Sy.No. 124 admeasuring Ac. 8-32 guntas of Lalaguda Village, Secunderabad to the petitioner-society under Section 23 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 read with G.O. Ms. No. 455, Rev.(U.C.I.) Department, dated 29.7.2002 and G.O. Ms. No. 1069 Rev.(U.C.I.) Department, dated 7.12.2002.2. Aknoor Durgaiah, S/o Rajaiah, P. Mallaiah, S/o P. Pedaramaiah and T. Rajali...
Y. Sangameshwar Rao Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD832
Ramesh Ranganathan, J.1. Writ Petition No. 29418 of 1997 is filed to quash the proceeding of the 3rd respondent dated 31-10-1992 confirmed, in appeal, by the order of the 2nd respondent dated 15/18.3.1993. The 3rd respondent, vide proceedings dated 31-10-1992, had imposed stoppage of five increments forever on the petitioner and the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed and the punishment imposed on him was confirmed.2. In W.P. No. 28763 of 1997, the proceedings of the 2nd respondent, dated 21-5-1997, whereby the petitioner was informed that the result of the sealed cover, containing the findings in respect of his suitability or otherwise for promotion to Officers' Cadre in JMGS-I had been annulled consequent to the punishment, of stoppage of five increments forever, imposed on him vide disciplinary authority's order dated 31-10-1992 and that the results of his promotion cannot be given effect to in terms of Clause VI of the sealed cover procedure prescribed in circular No. ...
Ratanlal JaIn and anr. Vs. Missu KutubuddIn Naseem and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD94
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. A.S. No. 3070 of 1999 was preferred by the plaintiffs in O.S.No. l of 1994 on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge's Court, Visakhapatnam. The respondents herein are the defendants in the suit.2. The brief averments of the plaint are as follows :3. The first defendant in this suit and the first defendants in O.S. Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of 1994 are the daughters of the second defendant. All the first defendants jointly owned undivided 1/4th share in the suit scheduled property and they agreed to sell their share at Rs. 1,150/- per square yard. Accordingly, each of them executed agreements of sale in favour of the first plaintiffs in each ?uit on 28-12-1988, after taking advance of Rs. 25,250/- towards part of sale consideration. The entire property is a contiguous single piece of land. It was agreed between the parties that the plaintiffs would obtain sale deeds after the first defendant obtaining no encumbrance certificate, no objection certificate from incom...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »