Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
Lanka Hanumantha Rao and ors. Vs. State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)986; 2005CriLJ4327
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioners are accused Nos.. 1 to 8 in Crime No. 149 of 2002 of P.S. Chilakaluripet under Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (I.P.C.). The de facto complainant, Rangamma, in her complaint given through the retired I.P.S. Officer alleged as under :'...When I was preparing to take away the tractor from the police station to my 51. house after settling the problem with the RTO, was stopped on the road at Adda road by a group of people. Among them I recognized Lanka Hanumantha Rao, Thota Rama Krishna, Thota Seshagiri, Byra Nagamma, Polasu Nagababu, Thota Lakshmaiah, Larika Sitamma and Lanka Anjaneyulu. There were on lookers also. Suddenly Thota Lakshmaiah came towards me and asked me to put my thumb impression on one blank paper and on two printed forms. I said I would not sign because I did not owe any money to any body. Then he told me that my husband had borrowed Rs. 2.000/- from Lanka Hanumantha Rao. He also told me that he would get me Rs. l.000/- as...
T.P. Varghese Vs. Branch Manager, Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd., Branch Of ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD752
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri Jayanthi S.C. Shekar, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri K. Gopala Krishna Murthy, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondents 1 to 4.2. The petitioner herein, who was working as a Clerk-cum-Cashier with the respondent-Bank, filed this writ petition, inter alia, seeking for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not acceding the request of the petitioner to stop or stall the domestic enquiry being conducted at the first respondent's premises in terms of Clause 19.4 of the Standing Orders of the Bank, having regard to the pendency of the criminal case in C.C. No. 117 of 2003 on the file of the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nellore, as bad, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India and also seeks further direction not to proceed with the domestic enquiry till the completion of the criminal trial.3. The facts, in brief, are that while the petit...
Pithapuram Municipality Vs. Christian Medical Centre
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD813
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri S. Nageshwara Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the appellant. None represents for respondent.2. Pithapuram Municipality represented by its Commissioner, aggrieved by the judgment and decree made in A.S.No. 12 of 1995 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Pithapuram had preferred the present second appeal.3. Respondent herein, Christian Medical Center represented by its Superintendent, Pithapuram, filed O.S. No. 59 of 1988 on the file of the District Munsif, Pithapuram, for declaration that the levy of tax of 989.01 ps to the house bearing Assessment No. 569, New Assessment No. 349, Door No. 1-3-22 by the defendant municipality as illegal and not binding on the plaintiff and also for consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from collecting the tax and also for declaration that the enhancement of tax for the above building from 686.84ps under a special notice dated 29-9-1986 as illegal and capricious and for consequential...
Appam Shankar Rao and ors. Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD760
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Viswanatham, learned Counsel representing the appellants and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue.2. The appellants aggrieved by the reversing judgment made in A.S.No. 13 of 1994 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Suryapet, had preferred the present second appeal.3. The appellants herein - plaintiffs in the suit, instituted O.S.No. 408 of 1989 on the file of the District Munsiff, Suryapet, as against the District Collector, Nalgonda and Others for declaration of title and perpetual injunction in relation to the plaint schedule property. The Court of first instance on appreciation of evidence of PW1 to PW4, DW1, the then Mandal Revenue Officer, and Exs.A1 to A7 and B1 to B9, ultimately decreed the suit and the matter was carried by way of appeal by the District Collector, Nalgonda and others in A.S.No. 13 of 1994 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Suryapet, and the Appellate Court on appreciation of the evidence available on record ultimately re...
Y. Ramalinga Reddy Vs. Charla Golla Venugopal and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD833; 2005(3)ALT684
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Vedula Venkataramana, the learned Counsel representing the appellant and Sri C. Sadasiva Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the first respondent.2. The unsuccessful second defendant in both the Courts below had preferred the second appeal. This Court on 1-5-1997 admitted the second appeal on the following substantial questions of law specified in Ground No. 5 of the memorandum of appeal:1. Whether the Courts below, in the absence of contest of the suit by the original owner (1st defendant) are justified in proceeding with the suit for specific performance of the suit agreement of sale, Ex.A1, when the appellant/2nd defendant has pleaded that Ex.A1 is a fabricated and concocted document, without framing a specific issue as to the genuineness of Ex.A1 ?2. Whether the Courts below are justified in appreciating the relative reliability of Ex.A1 and B1 of agreement of sale and whether the finding of the lower Appellate Court that the improbabilities appear...
N. Somi Reddy and anr. Vs. State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)406; 2005CriLJ3533
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. The revision petitioners are accused Nos. 2 and 4 in Calendar Case No. 30 of 1994 on the file of the Court of IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. They along with accused Nos. 1, 3, 5 and 6 were arraigned for offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 406 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The trial Court convicted all of them for offences under Sections 120-B, 420, 406 and 411 of IPC and recorded different sentences for the several accused. Aggrieved, the revision petitioners A-2 and A-4 filed Criminal Appeal No. 130 of 2001 before the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. In the appeal, the State filed Cr. M.P. No. 1292 of 2002 under Section 391 of Cr. P.C. for receiving additional evidence, namely, the question-cum-answer papers attached to Exs. P-81 to P-84 by examining Investigation Officer-P. W. 48 after recalling him. This application of the State was allowed by the order dated 14-11 -2002, where against this revision is filed.2. By the orde...
Gundsay Swaroopa Vs. Gundsay Balaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALT98
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. The plaintiff, who is the revision petitioner herein, filed the revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the docket Order dated 15-2-2005 passed in O.S. SR.No. 745 of 2005 by the learned Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, returning the plaint for payment of court fee under Section 34(1) of the A.P. Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act (for short 'the Act').2. The plaintiff instituted the above suit for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property and for allotment of 1/2 share (1/3rd share and 1/2 of 1/3rd share Mr. C. Ramachandraiah). While numbering the suit, the office of the lower Court took an objection as to the maintainability of the suit since as per the pahanies and pattedar passbook filed along with the plaint, the partition of the suit schedule property was already effected, and accordingly, called for an explanation from the plaintiff as to how she constitutes joint possession by returning the pl...
Nakka Ramagoud Vs. Prohibition and Excise Superintendent and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD405
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is the President of Toddy Tappers' Co-operative Society, Tunki Khalsa Village, Vargal Mandal, Medak District. The Society was granted licence to run the toddy shops within its area of operation. The grievance of the petitioner is that the second respondent was granted a licence to run the shop within the prohibited distance and that the same is affecting the sales in the shops being run by the petitioner Society.2. The first respondent filed a counter-affidavit. It is stated that the second respondent is the President of the Toddy Tappers' Co-operative Society, Meenajipet of the same Mandal and as contemplated under the Excise policy for the year 2004-05, a 'B' licence was issued in favour of the second respondent. It is stated that the distance between the shops established by the petitioner on the one hand and the one established by the second respondent, through the impugned licence, on the other, is more than 2 K.Ms. and, as such, it can...
G. Laxmaiah Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD407; 2005(3)ALT539; IV(2005)BC541; [2005]127CompCas13(AP)
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Judgment-debtor in EP No. 4 of 2003 in OS No. 12 of 2000 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy, filed this CRP., assailing the order dated 17-9-2004, passed by the Executing Court.2. The 2nd respondent herein was advanced some amount by the State Bank of Hyderabad, the 1st respondent, The petitioner offered himself as a surety, for repayment of the amount. Since the 2nd respondent committed default in repayment of the loan, the 1st respondent filed OS No. 12 of 2000. The suit was decreed on 29-12-2000 for a sum of Rs. 55,394/-. The petitioner and the 2nd respondent were held jointly and severally liable to pay the said amount. The decree became final.3. The 1st respondent filed EP No. 30 of 2001 for execution of the decree. The 2nd respondent offered to pay the decretal amount, in installments at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month. The 1st respondent agreed for the same, and the EP was closed. Alleging that the 2nd respondent committed d...
Repaka Prasada Rao Vs. Machilipatnam Municipality and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD623
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. This second appeal was admitted on 29.3.1997 to consider the following substantial question of law, which is referred to as hereunder:'Are not the Courts below in error in dismissing the plaintiff's suit, when it is an admitted fact that in pursuance of the allotment letter issued by the State Government, the plaintiff had deposited the earnest money'.2. Heard Sri S. Surya Prakasa Rao, learned Counsel representing the appellant-plaintiff and also the learned Standing Counsel representing Machilipatnam Municipality.3. The second appeal is preferred by the unsuccessful plaintiff in both the Courts below in getting the relief of Specific Performance. The appellant-plaintiff filed the suit in OS No. 185 of 1986 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Machilipatnam for the relief of Specific Performance of agreement of hire purchase system of the schedule house quarters by executing an agreement as per the terms of G.O. (P.S.) No. 2017 LA, Wealth and Local Adminis...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »