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.
Gmr Technologies and Industries Limited Vs. Transmission Corporation o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD1
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. Heard Sri L. Nageswara Rao, Senior Advocate and Sri C. Kodanda Ram, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri N. Subba Reddy, Sri Ramesh Ranganadhan, Sri M. Sree Ramulu Reddy and Ms. G. Sudha learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.2. Andhra Ferro Alloys Limited situated at Vizianagaram District filed three writ petitions in WP No.6147 of 2000, WP No.11192 of 2000 and WP No.2331 of 2001 to declare the supplementary demands of the Superintending Engineer, Operation, A.P. Transco, Vizianagaram, re-designated as the Superintending Engineer, Operation, Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited, Vizianagaram and the Senior Accounts Officer of the said operation circle.3. GMR Vasavi Industries Limited situated at Tekkali, Srikakulam District filed WP No.5713 of 2000 seeks a Writ of Mandamus to declare the demand of the respondents by way of supplementary bills as illegal, arbitrary and unlawful.4. GMR Technologies and Industries Limited situated at Ra...
Cheekolu Nagaiah Vs. State of A.P. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)989; II(2006)BC46
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. The second respondent herein fired a private complaint on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sullurpet against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner has committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 418, 419 and 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The facts, leading to filing the case, in brief, are noticed in the ensuing paragraph,2. The petitioner and first respondent are residing at PHC-1, Staff Quarters of SHAR at Sriharikota. The petitioner (hereafter called the accused) is working as a driver-cum-operator in A.P. Fire Services, whereas the second respondent (hereafter called, the complainant) is resident of same colony. According to the complaint, the accused, who is an agent of M/s. Tamilnadu Enterprises, Chennai, circulated pamphlets advertising a money circulation scheme promising various gifts to the members, who enroll other members. According to the scheme, every member who pays an amount of Rs. 150/- will get ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›