Andhra Pradesh Court April 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.
V.N. Sunanda Reddy Vs. State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD843; IV(2005)BC306; [2005]126CompCas516(AP); [2006]66SCL358(AP)
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondents.2. The petitioner seeks to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the Respondents 2 and 3 i.e., Inspector of Police, Langer House Police Station, Hyderabad and the Station House Officer, Panjagutta Police Station, Hyderabad not to proceed with the investigation in Crime No. 215 of 2005 on the file of Panjagutta Police Station, Hyderabad, holding that they have no jurisdiction and power to entertain the complaint lodged by the 4th respondent and to proceed with the investigation.3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the Managing Director of M/s. S.S. Organics Limited, a company, which is now registered as Sick Industrial Company before the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR). The 4th respondent is one of the share holder of the company and brother-in-law of one B. Subba Reddy who is the director of the company. The company became sick and the petitioner too...
Patcha Mahendra Vs. Koduru Penchalaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD151; 2005(4)ALT55; I(2006)BC257
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is defendant in O.S. No. 442 of 2003. The respondent filed the above suit on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Nellore for recovery of sum of Rs. 73,200/- based on a pronote dated 30-12-1996 allegedly executed by the petitioner. The plaint was presented with a Court fee of Rs. 1/- accompanied by a petition praying time to pay proper Court fee. The Trial Court accordingly allowed the time on three occasions and the respondent herein paid the Court fee of Rs. 2,866/- on 28-4-2003 and the plaint was registered as O.S.No. 442 of 2003. After receiving the summons and noticing the above position, present civil revision petition is filed.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri. P. Ganga Rami Reddy, contends that the action of the Trial Court in permitting the plaintiff to pay the Court fee with long delay after presentation of the plaint without valid reasons is bad in law. He would also urge that while exercising power under Section 1...
P. Nagalakshmaiah and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD253
ORDERElipe Dharma Rao, J.1. The first petitioner was elected as a Member of Kallur Weavers Co-operative Productions and Sale Society Limited about 25years back and was elected as President to the said society on 8.2.2003 and on 2.9.2003 he was elected as a Director of the 4th Respondent Society. While so, a No Confidence Motion was sought to be moved against one Sri Balla Chandra Nageshwara Rao, who' was elected as Chairman of the 5th respondent and the 2nd respondent has issued notice dated 24.2.2005 with the resolution of 16 members seeking to convene a meeting of the 4th respondent-Society so as to move No Confidence Motions, on 18.3.2005. It is averred that the said Balla Chandra Nageswara Rao has tendered his resignation, and thus the No Confidence Motion has become infructuous. It is the case of the petitioners that the 3rd respondent, who is representative of 4th respondent, ought to have taken steps under the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act (for brevity the Act) to fill up the ...
Pulimi Bapa Reddy Vs. Pulimi Dasaradharama Reddy (Died) by Lrs.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD342; 2005(6)ALT86
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 165 of 1987 is the appellant. He filed the suit against his younger brother, the sole defendant, for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. The defendant died during the pendency of the appeal. His LRs. are brought on record. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to, as arrayed in the suit.2. In brief, the plea of the plaintiff was that, their father late Subba Reddy, was a resident of Kodavalur and died in the year 1932, when the plaintiff and defendant were aged about 9 and 6 years, respectively. He pleaded that their father owned a rice mill; share in another rice mill and other immovable properties, and after his death, their mother, Rangamma, along with himself and his brother, shifted to Nellore and resided in the house of Rangamma's grand-mother. It is his case that with the money and other resources left by his father, Rangamma, purchased items 2 and 3 of the suit schedu...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. P. Sujatha and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC495; 2006ACJ1799; 2005(4)ALD352; 2005(4)ALT264
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. National Insurance Company filed this Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the correctness of the order, dated 20.1.2005 passed in I.A. No. 45 of 2005 in O.P. No. 1091 of 2001 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District whereby and whereunder the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge allowed the application filed by the third respondent in the O.P. under Order VI Rule 17 seeking permission to enhance the claim of the compensation amount from Rs. 2,50,000/-to Rs. 4,00,000/- by amending the petition.2. The necessary facts for disposal of this revision, in nutshell, are as follows:3. Respondents 2 and 3 are parents, 4th respondent is the sister and 5th respondent is the brother of deceased-Narender, who died in the accident that occurred on 10.8.2001, filed claim petition before the Tribunal below claiming compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- from the Insurance...
S. Mohammed AnwaruddIn (Died) Per L.Rs. Vs. Smt. Dr. Sabina Sultana
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: AIR2005AP508; 2005(4)ALD566; 2005(4)ALT597
A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 3-11-1980 in O.S. No. 707 of 1979 passed by the I Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad brought by the respondent/plaintiff to enforce specific performance of oral agreement to sell a house bearing No. 245/L2 at Mallepally allotted by the Housing Board in favour of the defendant.2. Upholding the defendant's plea that the agreement was hit by the provisions of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, earlier the appeal was allowed dismissing the suit of the plaintiff. The finding of applicability of Benami Transaction has been reversed by the Division Bench on the plaintiff's further appeal in LP.A. No. 277 of 1991 dated 23-2-1996 but dismissed the appeal on the plea that agreement is opposed to public policy and hence void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Aggrieved by the same plaintiff successfully carried the matter in appeal before the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal N...
Sadhu Varahala Babu and ors. Vs. Government of A.P., Co-operation Depa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALT126
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. These writ petitions are filed by the employees of various co-operative societies contending that they were illegally terminated by the respective societies without following the procedure prescribed under law or the principles of natural justice, therefore, they requested to issue writ of mandamus declaring the orders of their termination from service as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Act and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.2. The respondents contended that the orders of termination have been passed by following the provisions of the Act and the instructions given by the concerned authorities from time to time. Therefore, there is no illegality or arbitrariness in the orders of termination passed against the petitioners.3. Since these matters involved similar questions of fact and law, I wish to answer a common question of law regarding the maintainability of the writ petitions initially and the merits of the ...
Enernorth Industries Inc. Vs. Vbc Ferro Alloys Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: [2006]133CompCas130(AP)
S. Ananda Reddy, J.1. This company petition is filed by the petitioner-EnerNorth Industries Inc., Canada, under Section 433(e) and (f) read with Section 434(1)(a) of the Companies Act, 1956, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') seeking to pass an order of winding up against the respondent-company-VBC Ferro Alloys Ltd., Hyderabad, as the respondent-company was unable to clear the amounts to the petitioner-company, along with the amounts payable to other various creditors.2. It is stated that the petitioner is a company incorporated under the laws of Canada, having its registered office at 2, Adelaide Street West, Suite 301, Toronto, Ontario, M5H1L6, Canada. The petitioner-company was originally known as 'Energy Power Systems Ltd.', and its name has been changed to EnerNorth Industries Inc., as per the amendment dated February 11, 2003, issued by the Ministry of Consumer and Business Services, Ontario, Canada. The respondent-company was incorporated under the Act on October 3, 1981, as...
G. Parimala Vs. Bimala Bhatia and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD867; 2005(3)ALT301
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This C.R.P. is filed by the 2nd defendant in O.S. No.692 of 2002 on the file of the VIII Additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Hyderabad. He challenges the order dated 20-12-2004 passed by the trial Court in I.A. No.290 of 2004, refusing to enlarge time for filing additional written statement. The respondents 1 and 2 filed the suit for the relief of perpetual injunction against the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, restraining them from raising any loans on their documents deposited with the 3rd respondent, and to restrain the latter from releasing their documents, in favour of the petitioner. Mandatory injunction was also sought, against the 3rd respondent for release of certain documents. They filed I.A. No.1815 of 2003 to amend the plaint, to incorporate an alternative relief in the form of a direction to the petitioner, to clear that loan contracted with the 3rd respondent. The I.A. was ordered on 25-8-2003.2. The trial Court ...
Naidu Adikeshava Reddy Vs. Remella Venkata Rayanam and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD786
Gopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. Aggrieved by the common judgment dated 14.6.2004, delivered by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada in O.S. Nos.170 and 185 of 1997, the unsuccessful defendants in both the suits preferred these two appeals.2. The defendants in O.S. No. 170 of 1997 are appellants in A.S. No. 2804 of 2004 and the defendants in O.S. No. 185 of 1997 are appellants in A.S. No. 2834 of 2004. Plaintiffs in both the suits are one and the same.3. Since these two appeals arise out of the same common judgment rendered by the Court below, they are being disposed of by this common judgment For the sake of convenience, the parties will hereinafter be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants.4. The brief facts, according to the averments of the plaint in O.S. No. 170 of 1997 are that, the plaint schedule property admeasuring an extent of Acs.7.01 cts of dry land situated at Suryaraopet in Kakinada Municipality is belonging to the sole defendant Adikesava Reddy, who agree...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »