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.
Syed Pasha Vs. G.B. Prahalad Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT200
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This C.R.P. is filed against the order, dated 26-12-2003, in I.A. No. 689 of 2003, in O.S. No. 375 of 2002, on the file of the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sangareddy. The defendant in the suit is the petitioner and the sole plaintiff is the respondent herein. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to, as arrayed, in the suit.2. The plaintiff filed O.S. No. 375 of 2002, against the defendant, for recovery of a sum of Rs.76,926/-, in the trial court, by invoking the procedure under Order 37 Rule 4 C.P.C. An ex parte decree was passed on 15-11-2002. The defendant filed I.A. No. 68S of 2003, under Rule 4 of Order 37 CPC, with a prayer to set aside the ex parte decree, and sought permission to contest the suit, by filing the written statement. The application was opposed by the plaintiff. Through its order, dated 26-12-2003, the trial court dismissed the application.3. Sri M. Ram Mohan, learned counsel for the defendant, submits that t...
K. Mohan Lal and ors. Vs. Vice-chairman and Managing Director, A.P. St ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD304
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. Four, erstwhile Junior Assistants (Purchase), question the action of the A.P.S.R.T.C, in notifying them in the cadre of Junior Assistants (Material), as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and seek a direction that they be placed in the seniority list of Junior Assistant (Purchase), pursuant to the conversion order dated 9.11.1989, with all consequential benefits. 2. Facts, to the extent necessary for this writ petition, are that the 1st petitioner was appointed as a conductor on 9.3.1978, the second petitioner was appointed as comptist on 17.5.1978 and the 3rd and 4th petitioners were appointed as conductors on 13.2.1981 and 26.8.1985 respectively. All the four petitioners were selected, appointed by transfer as Junior Assistants and allotted to the personnel department. The 1st petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant on 29.8.1986, the 2nd petitioner on 26.5.1985 and 3rd and 4th petitioners on 1.9.1987 and 5.8.1987 respectively. The petitioners submitted a...
Pathri Ramamurthy Vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. L ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD110; 2005(6)ALT635
ORDERG. Chandraiah, J.1. Heard Sri N. Subba Rao, learned Counsel for the review petitioner and Sri A. Ramalingeshwara Rao, learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent - Insurance Company.2. This review petition is filed to review the order dated 22-10-2003 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in C.M.A. No. 551/2002.3. The brief facts of the case for better appreciation are that the workman/claimant was working as driver on lorry bearing No. ATS 6589, to which the 1st respondent herein was the owner. While so, during the course of employment on 8-8-2000 at 12-00 midnight, accident occurred. Alleging that the workman sustained grievous injuries, a claim petition under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') was filed before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-1, Guntur (for short 'the Commissioner'), claiming a compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-.4. The owner of the lorry remained ex parte and the insurer, co...
B. Harshitha and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT123
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioners in these three writ petitions seek Writs of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, particularly N.T.R. University of Health Sciences (for short 'the University'), and the Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh, in not following the scheme and procedure contained in G.O.Ms. No. 27, dated 4-6-2005, in the matter of selection of candidates against the seats reserved for sports category.2. The admissions into the First Year of M.B.B.S. and B.D.S., in the Government and Private Medical Colleges in the State of A.P., are made through a process of centralized counselling, by the University. Candidates are selected on the basis of their performance in the common entrance examination held for this purpose.3. Apart from providing reservations for socially backward classes, physically handicapped candidates, children of ex-servicemen, etc., the University provided for reservation of 0.5% of seats in favour of candidates, who have excelled in the gam...
K. Jayaprada Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD455; 2006(2)ALT168
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.2. The erstwhile Fair Price Shop Dealer of Renumakulapalli Village of Anantapur District, submitted his resignation as Dealer, and therefore, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur, issued notification vide Rc.No. DlCS/1344/2001 dated 20.7.2004, duly reserving the said dealership of Renumakulapalli Village, Uravakonda Mandal, for BC (general) category fixing the last date for receipt of applications on or before 2.8.2004. In response to the said notification, five candidates viz., petitioner herein, (2) K. Nageswaramma (3) K. Jagadeesh (4) K. Naresh Babu and (5) K.B. Sreenivasulu, had applied within time. After considering the necessary documents and after obtaining the character and antecedents of the candidates from the Mandal Revenue Officer, Uravakonda, vide Rc.No.B/218/2004 dated 30.9.2004, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur has conduc...
Ashok Kumar Agarwal Vs. Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewera ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2005
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD541; 2006(1)ALT554
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in disconnecting water supply connection under Account No. 052135509 in premises No. 1-5-6/33/1, Sri Krishna Colony, Musheerabad, Hyderabad (hereafter called, petition premises) on 09-7-2002 as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to respondents to reconnect water supply connection to the premises.2. The fact of the matter is not much in dispute. The petitioner entered into agreement with the owners of plot Nos. 33, 34 and 35 - respondents 6 to 8 herein, for construction of apartment block. A firm in the name and style of M/s. United Builders was constituted on 15-5-1985. The partnership deed however was superseded by another deed. While the construction was at advanced stage, disputes arose between the petitioner and respondents 6 to 8 (other partners of the firm). This led to respondents 6 to 8 filing a suit being O.S.No. 1482 of 1984 for diss...
Sujana Metal Products Limited and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2005
Reported in: (2008)11VST476(AP)
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The petitioners invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the second proviso to Section 19(1) of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as arbitrary, unfair and violative of Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and accordingly to struck down the same. The petitioners also pray for issuance of a consequential direction directing the 3rd respondent to entertain the appeals preferred against the assessment orders in proceedings RC No. 2910/2002-03/APGST/Int., and 1911/2002-03/APGST/Int dated August 6, 2003 respectively for the assessment year 2002-03 without insisting on payment of 121/2 per cent of the tax imposed by the Assistant Commissioner (Intelligence), the second respondent herein in terms of the said proviso. The petitioners also question the validity of the distraint order dated December 2, 2003.2. Shorn of all the details, the...
K.R. Krishna Murthy Vs. Hyderabad Allwyn Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD486; 2006(3)ALT50
A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. The defendant in the Court below filed this appeal against the judgment and decree of the I Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad dated 29-7-1987 passed in O.S. No. 712 of 1980, decreeing the suit of the respondent/plaintiff for possession of Quarter No. 22(A), Municipal No. 7-2-1790, Czech Colony, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad and directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs. 11,000/- towards past damages for use and occupation and future damages at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- from the date of filing of the suit till the date of delivery of the quarter.2. A short resume of facts, which are necessary for disposal of the appeal, are as under:3. For the sake of convenience the parties are arrayed as shown in the Court below.4. M/s. Hyderabad Allwyn Limited/ plaintiff, which was subsequently taken over by M/s. Voltas Limited during the pendency of appeal with effect from 1-4-1993 under a scheme of rehabilitation by Board for Industrial Finance and Reconstruction (BIFR) vid...
G. Chandra Mouli and ors. Vs. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Open University and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD195
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioners studied the degree course in Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Open University, the first respondent herein. They have taken the first, second and third year examinations of the relevant degree course in May 2005, at Bellampally Study Centre. The results for the examination of second year subjects were declared. However, the Controller of Examination issued a notice, dated 19.9.2005, stating that the performance of the petitioners and other candidates, who have taken the third year and the first year undergraduate examination held in May 2005, has been cancelled, in view of the resolution passed by the Committee constituted by the Vice-Chancellor. The affected students were advised to appear in the next examinations. The petitioners challenge the action of the respondents. They contend that the examinations for the first, second and third years were conducted in the same pattern and such of the candidates, who were found to resorted for mal practices, were...
Grandhi Madhava Rao (Died) Per Lrs. and ors. Vs. Municipal Commissione ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD260
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is a retired Government servant. He obtained building permission dated 1.3.1983 for construction of ground floor portion of a residential house, at plot No. 51 of N.G.G.O's Colony in Eluru. Again, in 1993 he applied for and obtained building permission on 1.3.1993 for construction of first floor portion. The respondent Municipality issued a show-cause notice under Sub-section (1) of Section 217 of the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965 ('the Act' for brevity) calling upon the petitioner to show-cause as to why the unauthorized construction should not be removed. It was pointed out in the said show-cause notice under Section 217(1) of the Act that (i) the petitioner constructed staircase in the front portion of the building in violation of Rule 9(2)(i)(a) of the Building Rules in Schedule-III of the Act and that (ii) he constructed a out-house in the back portion of the building in violation of Rule 9(4) of the Building Rules in Schedule-III annexed to th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »