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.
N. Devamma Vs. M. Akkamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD259; 2005(4)ALT73
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri K. Rathanga Pani Reddy, the counsel appearing for the petitioner.2. The revision petitioner is judgment debtor No. 2 in E.P. No. 687 of 2002 in O.S. No. 70 of 2002 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool. The petitioner moved E.A. No. 1505 of 2004 under Order XXI Rule 90 and Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer to set aside the sale held on 24-6-2004 or such other suitable relief.3. It is not in serious controversy that this order does not fall under Section 47 C.P.C. and this is an order falling under Order XXI Rule 90 C.P.C. The learned counsel, no doubt made an attempt to convince the Court that the present civil revision petition is maintainable in view of the fact that Order 43 Rule 1(j) of the Code of Civil Procedure specifies an appeal as against the order under Rule 72 or Rule 92 of Order XXI C.P.C. This Court is not inclined to accept with the said submission for the following reasons.Order 43 Rule 1(j) of ...
Padamati Veeraswamy and anr. Vs. Ankem Nacharamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD220
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri T.K. Sridhar and P. Vijaya Lakshmi, Counsel representing the respective parties.2. On 8-12-1997, this Court admitted the second appeal while framing the following substantial questions of law:1. Is the Appellate Court justified in decreeing the suit for injunction after finding that the plaintiff was not in possession of the suit Plot No. 23 as on the date of filing of the suit?2. Whether the Court can grant such decree under Order 41 Rule 33 C.P.C. under which Appellate Court has the power to pass any decree which ought to have been passed?In CMP No. 5264/97, the interim suspension granted on 30-4-1997 had had been extended until further orders.3. Anken Nancharamma, respondent in the second appeal, as against the judgment made in O.S. No. 286/87 on the file of I Additional District Munsif, Machilipatnam, which was received by transfer and numbered as O.S. No. 158/87 on the file of District Munsif, Bantumilli, filed A.S.No. 12/90 on the file of I Additiona...
Pabbithi Anjaneyulu Vs. Pabbathi N. Rathnamaiah Chetty and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD291
Ghulam Mohammed, J.1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 15-2-2000 passed in OS No. 3 of 1996 (old OS No. 8 of 1985 on the file of Sub-Court, Madanapalle) by the Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.2. The appellant herein is defendant No. 3 in the suit. The plaintiffs-respondents 1 and 2 herein filed the suit for partition and separate possession of 2/3rd share in the suit schedule property called Sree Lodge Building with upstairs and five shop rooms on the ground floor bearing Door Nos. 13-293, 13-294 and 13-295 with specific boundaries given in the plaint schedule.3. For the purpose of convenience, the parties herein shall be referred to as they were arrayed in the suit.The facts of the case are thus:4. The 1st plaintiff and 2nd plaintiff are father and son. Defendant No. 1 is the eldest brother of the 1st plaintiff. Defendant No. 2 and 3 are mother and another brother of the 1st plaintiff. The case of the plaintiffs is that the suit property is jointly own...
Krishnamsetty Basav Rao and anr. Vs. Kobashi Machine Tools (P.) Ltd. a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)BC324; [2005]126CompCas426(AP); [2005]64SCL299(AP)
S. Ananda Reddy, J.1. This company petition is filed by the petitioners under Section 433(f), read with Section 439(1)(c) and (3) of the Companies Act, 1956 praying :(a) That M/s. Kobashi Machine Tools Private Limited, respondent-company be wound up under the orders and directions of this hon'ble court and the official liquidator attached to this hon'ble court be appointed as liquidator of the company with its affairs, properties, books of account, vouchers, papers, etc., with all powers under Section 457 of the Companies Act, 1956 ;(b) That pending the hearing and disposal of the petition, the official liquidator be appointed as provisional liquidator of the company under Section 450 of the Companies Act, 1956 with all powers, under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 ;(c) That the cost of this petition and of the order to be made thereon be provided for.2. It is stated that the first respondent-company--Kobashi Machine Tools Private Limited, (for short 'the company') was incorp...
Chenchu Jayampu Eranna and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)754; 2005CriLJ2980
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool, framed charges in S. C. No. 42 of 2002 against A-1, A-2, and A3 for offences under Sections 302, 307 and 324 read with Section 34 I. P. C. If convicted A-1 and A-2 for the offence under Section 302 I. P. C. and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-each. A-3 was convicted for the offence under Section 324 I. P. C., and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. He was also imposed a fine of Rs. 500/ -, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the trial Court, by accused, Nos. 1 and 2.2. A-1 is the husband of the deceased, Narayanamma : A-2 is the brother and A-3 is the cousin of A-1, A-1 and deceased are said to have been engaged by one Mahaboob Basha, to watch the mango garden at Chanchu Colony, belonging to one Mr. Rami Reddy. PW-1 is the brother of the deceased, Narayana...
Nizam Club Vs. Employees State Insurance Corporation and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD834; 2005(5)ALT98; (2005)IIILLJ652AP
A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether an appeal lies under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') against the order passed by the Employees Insurance Court and Chairman, Industrial Tribunal-I, dismissing the petition filed under Section 75(2-B) of the Act for waiving the condition of depositing 50% of the contribution amount as demanded by the ESI Corporation or not?2. The facts, which are not in dispute, are that the Employees State Insurance Corporation issued proceedings dated 5-5-2003 to the appellant-club demanding a sum of Rs. 19, 51,950/-. Questioning the said demand notice, the appellant-club filed E.I.C. (Sr.) No. 2711 of 2003 under Section 75 of the Act before the Employees Insurance Court and Chairman, Industrial Tribunal, Hyderabad, raising a dispute with regard to the contribution of the amounts, so demanded, as due payable by it.3. Sub-section 2-B of Section 75 of the Act mandates ...
Syed Maqdoom Shah and anr. Vs. Basheer Khatoon and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD602; 2005(5)ALT619
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. This common order shall dispose of these miscellaneous applications filed in an appeal suit, which was allowed by this Court by judgment dated 25-1-1996 while reversing the judgment and decree of the Court of Additional Subordinate Judge, Ranga Reddy District in O.S. No. 491 of 1997. A.S.M.P. No. 11880 of 2004 is filed under Section 152 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) praying this Court to amend the decree dated 25-1-1996 by granting the relief of partition and separate possession of 1/2 share in suit schedule property in favour of the petitioners. A.S.M.P.(S.R)No. 55622 of 2004 is filed praying this Court to amend the provisions of law in miscellaneous application being A.S.M.P. No. 11880 of 2004 as one under Sections 151, 152 and 153 of CPC whereas the other miscellaneous application being A.S.M.P.(S.R) No. 55623 of 2004 is filed praying this Court to permit the petitioner to amend the prayer by adding the words '.. .or in the alternative to pass a suppl...
Nallam Seeta Mahalakshmi and ors. Vs. Talari Vijayalakshmi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD130; 2005(6)ALT65
A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal by defendants 1 to 3 against the judgment and decree granted by the Subordinate Judge, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District dated 25.8.1986 made in O.S. No. 227 of 1980 wherein the learned Subordinate Judge decreed the suit of the plaintiff for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 10.7.1980.2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter the parties are referred to as they were arrayed before the Court below.3. The plaintiff filed the suit to enforce the specific performance of agreement of sale dated 10.7.1980 to sell the house including the open land of Ac.0.17 1/2 cents within Bhimavaram Municipal Area; for delivery of vacant possession after execution of sale deed by all the defendants or in the alternative to direct the defendants 1 to 3 to execute the sale deed of their 17/21 share in the property and for partition of the said share and separate possession; in the alternative, if the said decree cannot be granted, for return of Rs. 10,0...
Neel Madhav Mining Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Authorised Officer, Union of ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD806; 2005(4)ALT136; III(2006)BC311; [2005]127CompCas846(AP); [2005]62SCL383(AP)
J. Chelameswar, J.1. The petitioner filed this writ petition with the prayer as follows:'For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit filed in support of the above Writ Petition the petitioners herein pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction in the nature of the writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing the order passed in I.A. No. 655 of 2004 in O.A. No. 101 of 2004 on the file of Debt Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, dated 9-12-2004 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.'2. Notice before admission was ordered on 21-2-2005. The respondent-bank is served. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-bank.3. The petitioners borrowed certain amounts from the Union Bank of India, and the officers of the Bank are shown as respondents 1 and 2 in the writ petition. As per the affidavit ...
Thanamki Prasad Vs. Guntamadugu Puliamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD247; 2005(4)ALT119
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is the plaintiff in an unnumbered suit being C.F. No. 3402 of 2004. The said suit was presented to the Court of the District Judge, Nellore. By an order dated 19-11-2004, the learned District Judge rejected the plaint at the threshold on the ground that the plaint allegations are vague, that the plaintiff did not file any supporting documents showing the title of 51 defendants to the land agreed to be demised in favour of the plaintiff and also pointing out certain minor procedural discrepancies. Aggrieved by the same, the present petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India. The petitioner filed the suit for specific performance of agreement of sale in respect of the suit schedule fallow lands situated at Oduru Diguva Rajupalem of Chillakur Mandal in Nellore District. It is the case of the petitioner that all the 51 defendants who own lands ranging from Ac. 1.00 to Acs. 12.45 agreed to sell the land in their possession and executed ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »