Andhra Pradesh Court November 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.
Gangavarapu @ V. Pulmani and ors. Vs. Balumuri Venkateswarlu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(3)ALT4
P. Swaroop Reddy, J.1. This C.M.A. is filed against the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, West Godavari, at Eluru, passed in O.P. No. 387 of 1994, dated 31-10-1998. The claimants are appellants.2. The case of the petitioners is that on 30-3-1994 at about 1.00 p.m., the deceased, who was a Regional Deputy Director, Information and Public Relations Department, Vijayawada was going in a jeep bearing No. AP 16-U/2164 along with his driver and when they reached at K.M. Stone 71/6-71/8 on N.H. No. 5 near Denduluru village, West Godavari District, lorry bearing No. ATW 4559 driven by the first respondent coming from Hyderabad side came in a rash and negligent manner and in high speed and dashed the said jeep. Consequently the deceased in this O.P. and the driver of the lorry died.3. Separate O.P. for compensation for the death of the driver is also filed and tried as O.P. No. 389 of 1994 along with the present O.P. No. 387 of 1994.4. A joint trial was held and in this case the pet...
Nandhini Delux Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Its Principal ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD212; 2005(6)ALT748
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. This writ petition is filed praying for a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent in disqualifying the petitioner in the technical bid for leasing out restaurant, canteen and pantry at A.P.Bhavan, New Delhi, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. At the stage of admission itself, the first respondent, namely, Government of Andhra Pradesh, and second respondent (who was impleaded later) filed counter affidavits. The learned Counsel appearing for rival parties made detailed submissions and therefore with their consent the matter is being disposed of by this order. The petitioner also seeks a consequential direction to the first respondent to accept the technical bid of the petitioner and consider price bid. Alternatively, it is also prayed to cancel the tender process pursuant to tender notice dated 03-08-2005.2. The case of the petitioner as disclosed in the writ affidavit, in brief, is as follows. The ...
R. Narender and anr. Vs. State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD465; 2006(2)ALT165
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioners challenge the selection process adopted by the 5th respondent, a private engineering college, hereinafter referred to as 'the college', in the matter of selection to the posts of Assistant Professor, in the Departments of Science & Humanities and Mechanical Engineering, in pursuance of two advertisements issued by it, on 16.4.2005 and 21.4.2005.2. The first petitioner was appointed on consolidated basis, as Assistant Professor in Science, on 9.9.2002, and the second petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor in Mechanical Engineering on 11.10.2004, on ad hoc basis. The college is affiliated to the Osmania University, the third respondent. It proposed to fill the vacancies, against which the petitioners are working, and several other posts on regular basis, in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the third respondent. Advertisements were issued on the dates referred to above. The petitioners and several others applied for it.3. T...
Fertilizers, Pesticides and Seeds Dealers Welfare Association Vs. Muni ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD574; 2006(2)ALT108
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. Fertilizers, Pesticides and Seeds Dealers Welfare Association, Suryapet is the petitioner in W.P. No. 26242 of 2000. Suryapet Kirana Merchants Association is the petitioner in W.P. No. 26455 of 2000. The Cloth Merchants Association of Suryapet is the petitioner in W.P. No. 7050 of 2001. In all the writ petitions, the resolution bearing MCRNo. 163, dated 27.3.1999 passed by the Municipal council, Suryapet is assailed as illegal and without jurisdiction. As the contentions raised in all the writ petitions are similar, these writ petitions are disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioners contend that the retail business in fertilizers/pesticides/ seeds, kirana business and/or cloth business are not the purposes for which a licence/ trade licence is required under Section 263 read with Schedule IV of A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965 (the Act, for short) and therefore, the respondent Municipality cannot, in law, insist upon the members of the petitioners associatio...
J. Charles Joseph Vs. Veronica and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD92; 2006(1)ALT638; IV(2006)BC279
ORDERGopaia Krishna Tamada, J.1. These civil revision petitions are directed against the common order, 27-10-2004 passed in E.A.No.271 of 2004 and E.A.No.241 of 2004 in E.P.No.50 of 1997. As the point involved is one and the same, these revision petitions are taken up for disposal by this common order.2. E.A.No.271 of 2004 is filed to reopen E.A. No.241 of 2004 and to receive the application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act'). E.A. No.241 of 2004 is filed under Order 21, Rule 89 C.P.C. to set aside the sale held on 8-12-1998.3. The facts are that the plaintiff-lst respondent herein filed O.S.No.373 of 1992 for recovery of an amount of Rs.34,072/-. As the petitioner herein i.e., the defendant and his wife in the suit did not contest the matter, the suit was decreed ex parte. Thereafter, the plaintiff-decree holder filed E.P.No.50 of 1997 for recovery of the decretal amount of Rs.59,368/-. As the amount was not paid, she filed an application for sale of th...
Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Vs. P. Hanumantha Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD(Cri)332; 2006CriLJ1675
Gopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. This appeal, by the State, is directed against the judgment, dated 21-5-1997 in C.C. No. 98 of 1994 on the file of XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, by which, the accused i.e. the respondent herein was acquitted of the charges punishable under Sections 409, 471, 420, 468 and 474(a)I.P.C.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the respondent herein was working as Special Assistant at the relevant point of time in Syndicate Bank of Bolaram Branch whose Branch Manager filed a complaint before the Sub-Inspector of Police, Team-IV, CCS, DD, Hyderabad which was registered as Crime No. 83 of 1989 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 409, 471, 420, 468 and 474(a) IPC. The allegation of the complaint is that the respondent herein abused his official position and misappropriated various amounts by manipulating and destroying the records on various occasions. On the basis of the complaint, the criminal law is set into motion, and after condu...
Phoolchand Agarwal Vs. D. Narayana Swamy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD289
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. This C.R.P. is directed against the order dated 5-7-2004, passed by the VIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dismissing the application in I.A. No. 542 of 2004 in O.S. No. 1515 of 2001, praying to reject Exs.A3 to A27 from the list of documents for want of sufficient stamp duty and registration.2. The respondent is the plaintiff. While the petitioner is the defendant. The plaintiff filed suit against the defendant for eviction from the suit schedule property. The plaintiff filed affidavit in lieu of chief-examination of his witness on 24-1-2003 and marked documents Exs.A1 to A27. The petitioner contending that he had no opportunity to object to the marking of the documents, filed the present application, praying to reject the documents Exs.A3 to A27. However, during the course of arguments, he confined his prayed only to the extent of rejecting the marking of Ex.A27-lease deed, on the ground that it is insufficiently stamp and is not registered. ...
P. Raghu Vamshi Vs. Vice-chancellor, Jntu and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD294
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioners in this batch of writ petitions are students of Engineering courses, studying in various colleges. The colleges, in which the petitioners are studying, are affiliated to Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU).2. The petitioners were not permitted to appear in the First semester examination of the corresponding year, in which they are studying, on the ground that there is shortage of attendance. While in some cases, it is alleged that attendance was not properly marked, or that the classes have not been conducted regularly, in certain other cases, the reasons that contributed for the shortage in the attendance, have been pleaded. The petitioner in W.P.No. 23711 of 2005 states that he has been securing very high marks all through and that the shortage of attendance in the First semester of IV-year is, on account of acute illness.3. Learned Counsel for the respective petitioners, submit that the shortage of attendance for the respect...
P. Satyanarayanarao Construction Company Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Rep ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT130; 2006(3)ARBLR295(AP)
D.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard both sides.2. With the consent of both the parties, the main appeal itself is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission.3. This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the order dated 9-10-2000, passed by the court below in O.P. No. 41 of 1995 on the file of III Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad.4. The factual background appears to be that certain works have been undertaken by the claimant and after completion of the work, certain disputes have been raised and arbitrators have been appointed as agreed in the General Conditions of the Contract. The matter was adjudicated. During the process of adjudication, time was extended at the instance of the arbitrator and as agreed by both the parties. This extension had been made from time to time. However, the fact, which is not is dispute, is that the arbitrators could not pass the award within the prescribed period, under the Arbitration Act, 1940. After completion of the extended period, on...
B. Anil Kumar Reddy Vs. Margadarsi Chit Fund Limited and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT195
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This court ordered notice before admission on 7-10-2005 and in pursuance thereof, the learned counsel representing the first respondent entered appearance. Both the learned counsel made submissions in elaboration and hence, the matter is being disposed of at the stage of admission.2. Sri M. N. Narasimha Reddy, learned counsel representing the revision petitioner would contend that the suit O.S. No. 81 of 2000 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Cuddapah was instituted by a Company registered under the Companies Act, represented by its Branch Manager, S. Chandra Sekhar. The learned counsel also would maintain that the plaint was presented on 18-8-2000 and there was no authorization for the Manager to present the suit on the said date. The learned counsel also pointed out the subsequent events and would maintain that even otherwise, there was no subsequent ratification and in any view of the matter, the plaint is liable to be rejected. The learned counsel had ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »