Andhra Pradesh Court June 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.
K. Raja Gopal Vs. M. Venkatappa and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD79
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order passed by the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Chittoor in an application filed under Section 144 read with 151 C.P.C.2. The relevant facts, in brief, are as under:The petitioner filed O.S. No. 111 of 1988 in the said Court for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale. The suit was decreed ex parte on 06-04-1990. The petitioner filed E.P. 18 of 1991 for execution of the sale deed. The sale deed was executed by the Court itself. In E.P. No. 45 of 1992, possession of the suit schedule property was delivered on 03-02-1993.3. The respondents filed I.A. No. 7 of 1993 under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. stating that the ex parte decree was obtained fraudulently. The I.A. was rejected. They approached this court and ultimately the ex parte decree, dated 06-04-1990, was set aside and the suit was directed to be tried afresh. The suit was renumbered as O.S. No. 768 of 2002. Respondents filed I.A. No. 651 of 2004 ...
Mahankali Venkatachari Vs. Mahankali Srinivasachari and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD465
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Mr. Mahankali Venkatachari, the defendant in O.S. No. 128 of 1983 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Kavali, aggrieved by the judgment and decree made in O.S. No. 128 of 1983, dated 8-2-1994, had preferred the present appeal.2. The respondents herein who were the then minor children and the wife of said Mahankali Venkatachari filed the said suit claiming the relief of partition and separate possession of their respective shares and also for maintenance.3. The learned Subordinate Judge, Kavali, on the respective pleadings of the parties, having settled the issues, recorded the evidence of P.W.1, D.Ws.1 to 3 and marked Exs.B-1 to B-3, and on appreciation of evidence available on record, ultimately decreed the suit granting the relief of partition and also granting the relief of maintenance to the wife, the third plaintiff, at Rs. 500/- per month, Rs. 300/- towards clothing per year and Rs. 1,000/- towards separate residence per year and inasmuch as the fourth plaintiff...
P.V. Subba Rao and anr. Vs. Sunkari Varahalamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD175; 2005(4)ALT142
R. Subhash Reddy, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'), is filed by the Appellants, aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, passed in M.O.P. No. 679 of 2001, dated 29-7-2004.2. The said claim petition was filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Act claiming compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of death of the deceased, who was their son and who died in a motor accident, which took place on 1-6-2000. As averred in the claim petition, it was their case that the deceased was a diploma holder in electrical and he was working as a Supervisor with the 1st appellant herein. It is stated that on the date of the accident the deceased was travelling as a pillion rider on scooter, which was driven by the 2nd appellant herein. When they were proceeding near Ramabadrapuram, the Scooter met with an accident, the deceased fell down from the Scoot...
Sri Rama Sri Kanyakaparameswari Srinagareswara Swamy Varla Alayamulu V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALT435
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Defendant No. 1 in O.S. No. 279 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge at Nuzvid is the petitioner. The suit was filed by the first respondent. Respondents 2 and 3 are defendants 2 and 3 in the suit.2. The first respondent was lessee of about Ac. 14.00 of agricultural land belonging to the petitioner-temple since the year 1992. The petitioner served a notice on 01-04-2003 calling upon the first respondent to vacate the land stating that by operation of Section 82 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act'), the lease stood terminated. The first respondent filed the suit for the relief of perpetual injunction. He also filed I.A. No. 610 of 2003 for temporary injunction. Initially, an order of ex parte temporary injunction was passed on 18-08-2003.3. The petitioner filed a counter-affidavit in the I.A. stating that the lease in favour of the first respondent stood terminated and o...
Utham Kumar JaIn Vs. the State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)676; 2005CriLJ3601
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is an accused in Crime No. 43 of 2004 of Town Police Station, Sangareddy, under Sections 379 and 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC). In this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), the petitioner seeks to quash the said crime on the ground that if investigation into the crime is allowed, the same would amount to abuse of process of law.2. The fact of the matter is as follows. The petitioner claims to be engaged in the business of financing in the name and style of 'Sumangal Finance and Investments'. It is alleged that second respondent approached the petitioner for a loan to purchase D.C.M. commercial vehicle on hire-purchase basis. Accepting the request, the petitioner purchased D.C.M. commercial goods vehicle bearing registration No. AP. 23.T.2728 against execution of hire-purchase agreement dated 30-10-1995. Under the said agreement, the petitioner is owner of the vehicle and second respondent is hir...
Y. Vasudeva Rao and anr. Vs. State of A.P. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)568; 2005CriLJ3774
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in P. R. C. No. 32 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. They are alleged to have committed an offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the Act). In this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) they seek quashing of the said P.R.C. Be it also noted, the petitioners earlier filed Criminal Petition No. 3019 of 2001 to quash the case when the same was at the stage of investigation in crime No 238 of 2001 of P. S., Chilakalguda, Secunderabad, and which was registered on an endorsement made by the Court of X Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. Be it also noted, by an order dated 12-2-2002, this Court dismissed the Criminal Petition by reasoned order. Be it also further noted that after the dismissal of the Criminal Petition referred to herein, the X Metro...
K. Sulochana Vs. District Collector and District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD539; 2005(5)ALT241
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri P. Vengal Reddy, Counsel for writ petitioners in both to the writ petitions, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and the learned Standing Counsel Sri S.M. Subhani representing the A.P. State Wakf Board.2. The writ petitioners in these writ petitions K. Sulochana and K. Sai Baba Guptha respectively had questioned Rc.No. E8/2262/2002 dated 17-8-2002 of the 1st respondent, District Collector and District Magistrate, Kurnool on the ground that the same is illegal, without jurisdiction, arbitrary and unreasonable and prayed for such other suitable reliefs. In view of the fact that common questions are involved both these writ petitions are being disposed of by a common order.3. The proceedings of the Collector and District Magistrate, Kurnool dated 17-8-2002, the impugned notice in these writ petitions, reads as hereunder :Proceedings of the Collector and DistrictMagistrate, KurnoolPresent : Sri G. Sai Prasad, I.A.S.Rc.E8/2262/2002Dated 17-8-2002Sub...
Satya Sai Chemicals and Seeds Company and anr. Vs. Modern Proteins Ltd ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD477
P.S. Narayana, J.Introduction1. The unsuccessful defendants, aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 7-7-1994 made in O.S. No. 28 of 1992 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Kurnool, had preferred the present appeal.2. The respondent/plaintiff instituted the suit specified supra against the appellants/ defendants for recovery of Rs. 2,18,490-60 ps. due on business dealings with future interest and costs of the suit. The trial Court, on the strength of the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 D.W.1 and Exs.A-1 to A-37 and Exs.B-1 to B-12, ultimately came to the conclusion that respondent/plaintiff is entitled to a decree for Rs. 1,26,187-35 ps. less Rs. 25,133-80 ps, (paid after filing of the suit) with proportionate costs and with interest at 24% per annum from the date of suit to the date of decree and thereafter at 6% per annum till the date of realization.Submissions of learned Counsel for appellants3. Sri R.V. Prasad, the learned Counsel representing the appellants/ defendants ...
Papuri Deveedu Vs. Banavath Lokhya and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD559; 2005(5)ALT20; I(2007)BC384
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Counsel on record.2. Notice before admission was ordered by this Court on 18-6-2004 and the matter is coming up for admission today.3. Papuri Deveedu, the writ petitioner filed the present writ petition praying for a writ, order or direction more in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of entertaining I.P.No. 4/2004 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Khammam as null and void and pass such other suitable orders.4. The writ petitioner herein had averred that the 1st respondent in the writ petition, Banavath Lokhya, borrowed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the writ petitioner and executed a demand promissory note on 18-9-2001 agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum and the 1st respondent failed to pay the said amount and hence the writ petitioner filed O.S. No. 3161/2002 on the file of III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur which was decreed on 12-11-2002. The writ petitioner also filed E.P. and got the same transferred to th...
Rukya Bee and anr. Vs. Syed Afzal and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD463; 2005(4)ALT465
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 170 of 1991, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Zaheerabad, are the petitioners herein. They challenge the order dated 11-10-2004 passed by the trial Court, impleading the first petitioner (sic. respondent) herein as one of the parties to the suit.2. The suit was filed by the petitioners herein for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property against the respondents 2 to 5 herein, the defendants. A preliminary decree was passed on 19-7-1995, directing that the petitioners on the one hand, and the respondents 2 to 5 on the other hand, shall be entitled to two equal shares in the suit schedule property. The respondents 2 to 5 herein filed A.S. No. 32 of 1995, in the Court of District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, and it was dismissed on 25-8-2000. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents 2 to 5 filed S. A. No. 129 of 2001, and it was also dismissed by this Court on 8-2-2002. Thereafter, the petition...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »