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.
C.N. Sundaram Vs. Chenai Finance Company Limited and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD850; 2005(5)ALT60
N.V. Ramana, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14-11-1994 passed by the IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O.S. No. 322 of 1989.2. The appellant is Defendant No. 7 and Respondent No. 1 is the plaintiff. The appeal, as against Respondent Nos. 2 to 7, who are Defendant Nos. 1 to 6, was dismissed for default, vide order of this Court dated 31-12-2001. They were also set ex parte in the suit before the Court below. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as arrayed in the suit.3. The plaintiff, which is a finance company, claims to have advanced a loan amounting to Rs. 1,50,000/- to Defendant No. 1, which is a partnership firm, vide cheque dated 3-11-1986, for purchase of a bore rig, and that Defendant Nos. 2 to 5, who are partners in Defendant No. 1 along with Defendant Nos. 6 and 7 stood as guarantors to the loan amount, and executed loan documents agreeing to repay the loan amount with interest at the rate of 25% p...
Soora Ramachadra Reddy (Died) and ors. Vs. G. Paradesi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALT420
ORDERR. Subhash Reddy, J.1. These two Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, aggrieved by the interlocutory orders passed in execution proceedings in E.A.No. 546 of 1997 and E.A.No. 544 of 1997 respectively in OEP.No. 66 of 1997 in O.S.No. 46 of 1977 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi.2. Civil Revision Petition No. 1526 of 2005 filed against the orders passed by the Court below in E.A.No. 546 of 1997, dismissing the application filed under Section 47 read with Section 151 CPC; whereas, Civil Revision Petition No. 1529 of 2005 is filed against the order in E.A.No. 544 of 1997, allowing the application filed by the respondents-decree holders for police aid, to execute the decree in O.S.No. 46 of 1977.3. Originally one Guduru Chenga Reddy has filed suit in O.S.No. 46 of 1977 against the petitioners herein for delivery of vacant possession of the suit schedule property, i.e. Ac.0.94 cents of land, situated on Tiruchunur roa...
Ravuri Manohar Babu Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)859; 2005CriLJ3562
B. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the order dated 2-5-2003 passed in M.V.O.P. No. 883 of 1998 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Guntur, whereby, the learned Additional District Judge found R.W. 1 Ravuri Manohar Babu guilty for the offence under Section 344, Cr. P.C. and convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to undergo simple Imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default, to suffer simple Imprisonment for one month.2. The appellant is R.W. 1 in M.V.O.P. No. 883 of 1998. The facts of the case, in brief, giving rise to filing of this criminal appeal by R.W. 1 Ravuri Manohar Babu in M.V.O.P. No. 883 of 1998 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Guntur, are as follows :Neelam Parvathamma, Neelam Syam Prasad and Neelam Rambabu filed M.V.O.P. No. 883 of 1998 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the death of Neelam Venkata Satyanarayana in a road ac...
S. Nagaraj Vs. State and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)777; 2005CriLJ3913
ORDERGopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. The petitioner, who is the Managing Partner in M/s. Raj Biotech Pharma, Hyderabad, and was issued summons under Section 67 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act') apprehending arrest at any time by the Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, South Zonal Unit, C-3A, II Floor, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennaiah, filed this petition seeking anticipatory bail.2. The facts are that the petitioner is the licenced manufacturer of drugs and carrying on a pharmaceuticals business in the name and style of M/s. Raj Biotech Pharma, at Uppal, Hyderabad. Basing on the seizure of a stock 67.160 Kgs of Ephedrine on 9-12-2004 from the godown of Andhra Pradesh Express Services Private Limited, Kalba Devi Road, Mumbai, and also basing on the statement of one K.V. Satyanarayana, who booked the said consignment at the instance of one Hitesh Dhirajlal Mojoria of Secunderabad on 8-2-2005 from the petitioner, the offic...
Sree Rayalaseema Alkalies and Allied Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Transmission C ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD727; 2005(3)ALT412
ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard both sides.2. This is a unique case where bureaucratic inertia is being demonstrated in flying colours.3. The facts, shorn of, are that the petitioner is a Public Limited Company engaged in production of caustic soda. The unit was started initially with a load factor of 0.9, which is the minimum. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner-company was the only company in the entire country started using a unique technology called 'Bi-Polar Cell Membrane Technology'. The petitioner-company initially, i.e., somewhere in the year 1987, made an application to grant power supply with 0.9 load factor. That was not considered by the respondents. In the meanwhile, keeping in view the representations of various other companies, the Government had constituted a Standing Committee (for brevity 'the Committee') somewhere in the year 1988. The said Committee made certain recommendations and issued guidelines, out of which Guideline Nos. 7.4 and 7.6, which are signifi...
Syed Khaja MohiuddIn Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)740; I(2006)DMC32
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 407(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code. 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.'), by accused Nos. 1 to 4 in Crime No. 19 of 2004 of P.S. Yerraguntla, Cuddapah District. They pray this Court to transfer the case file in Crime No. 19 of 2004 of P.S. Yerraguntla, within the jurisdiction of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kamalapuram, Cuddapah District, to the Court of XXII Metropolitan Magistrate and Mahila Court, Hyderabad.2. The fact of the matter is in a narrow compass. The first petitioner married Syed Rasheeda Begum, daughter of Mahboob Ali, on 27.2.2002. She (not made party to this petition) is a resident of Yerraguntla town of Kamalapuram Mandal, Cuddapah District and the marriage was performed at the said place. After marriage, Rasheeda Begum came to matrimonial home at Chilkalguda, Secunderabad and started living with the petitioners herein. According to the petitioners, the wife of the first petitio...
Mamillapalli Chinakoteswara Rao and ors. Vs. Mandal Revenue Officer an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD126; 2005(3)ALT88
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Dadi Narayana Swamy, (3rd respondent) filed a petition in SR No. 96 of 1979 before the Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, seeking restoration of the lands to him. By the Order dated 23-5-1980 the Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, allowed the said petition. That Order was kept in abeyance by virtue of G.O.Ms.No. 129, Social Welfare Department, dt. 13-8-1979. After the said GO was quashed in W.P.No. 1755 of 1980, by the Order dated 5-12-1984, the Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare), by his Order dated 28-4-1986 directed the respondents in SR No. 96 of 1979 i.e., Achanta Ayanna, Doddi Veeranna, Parimi Rattayya, Parimi Surya Rao, Avula Mavulayya and Ch. Ramayyamma to restore possession of Ac.35-00 cents in patta No. 27, to the 3rd respondent. Aggrieved by the said order, D. Veeranna, Parimin Rathaiah and Parimi Surya Rao preferred S.R.A.No. 31 of 1986 to the Agent to the Government, who by his Order dated 20-8-1987 allowed the same in respect...
M.A. Mukheed Vs. C. Pandurangam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD764; 2005(3)ALT424
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No. 74 of 2002, filed for recovery of certain amount, in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Mahaboobnagar. He was set ex parte, and ultimately, an ex parte decree was passed on 23-1-2003. The petitioner filed I.A. No. 416 of 2003, under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. That petition was ordered, on condition that he shall pay costs of Rs. 200/-, on or before 15-6-2004. The petitioner did not comply with that condition. He filed I.A.SR. No. 2026 of 2004, for enlargement of the time for compliance with the condition imposed in I.A. No. 416 of 2003. The trial Court dismissed the I.A.SR., through its order dated 2-12-2004, on the ground that it is not maintainable.2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent.3. When the petitioner committed default in responding to the summons received by him in the suit, an ex parte decree came to be passed. The trial Court has shown indulgence and set aside the ex ...
Aashrith Hotels Vs. Assistant Medical Officer of Health
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD505; 2005(3)ALT536
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J1. Petitioner, who is running a restaurant under the name and style of '36 Jubilee Hills Multi Cuisine Restaurant' at Road No. 36, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, with an intention to open a Bar also therein, made an application for a 'No Objection Certificate (NOC), as contemplated by the A.P. Excise Act, 1968 (the Act), to the Municipal Corporation. Respondent by his proceedings No. 4146/H/ CV/MCH/2004/3475, dated 6-12-2004 informed the petitioner that its request to open a Bar & Restaurant at Plot No. 237/A, Road No. 36, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, is rejected since establishment of a Bar is not permissible in a residential area. The said order is impugned in this petition.2. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since NOC from the respondent is required only to find out if the applicant can be given a trade licence or not, and since question of granting permission in residential area for running a Bar is exclusively in the jurisdiction of t...
Velieneni Gopala Rao Vs. Velineni Pitchamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD847
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri B. Adinarayana Rao, Counsel representing the appellant and Sri K. Harinath, Counsel representing the respondent.2. The second appeal was admitted on 17-4-1997 and the following substantial question of law 'Whether enhancement of maintenance is permissible solely on the ground of raise in cost of living in the absence of any proof of changed circumstances regarding the means of the defendant' had been framed.3. Velineni Gopala Rao, 1st defendant in the suit O.S. No. 450/87 on the file of Munsif Magistrate, Ponnur and the 1st respondent in the Appeal A.S. No. 32/94 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Bapatla, the husband, aggrieved by the reversing judgment and decree wherein some enhancement of maintenance had been granted to the plaintiff/appellant/wife Velineni Pitchamma, had preferred this second appeal. Submissions were made on the substantial question of law referred to supra in the light of the evidence available on record. The respondent/plaintiff file...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »