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. Laxmibai Vs. Provident Fund Commissioner and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD765; 2005(4)ALT541; [2006(108)FLR613]
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. A poor widow, knocks the door of this Court seeking pension under the Employees Family Pension Scheme, 1971 (for brevity 'the Scheme').2. Considering her plight, I enquired from Sri R.N. Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, whether he could impress upon his clients to consider her case sympathetically and provide family pension to the hapless widow, who approached this Court 12 years ago, and who, now, must be around 65 years of age. On instructions from the Respondent authorities, Sri R.N. Reddy informed this Court that, there are several such cases which are pending with the Provident Fund Department, and indulgence shown in one case, contrary to statutory provisions, would result in a large number of similar claims being made. This necessitated the writ petition being heard on merits.3. The facts, relevant for the purpose of this writ petition, are that the petitioner's husband Sri K. Manikyam was an employee of Ajam Zahi Mills, Warangal for over 30 years a...
Tulasi Viswa Karma Home Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vayunandan Estates Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD392; 2005(4)ALT512; 2006(1)ARBLR445(AP)
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This C.R.P., is filed against the order dated 9-3-2005 passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District in I.A. No. 760 of 2005 in O.S. No. 44 of 2005.2. The petitioner and the respondent are private limited companies. The respondent filed the suit for the relief of perpetual injunction restraining the petitioner herein or his authorized persons and subordinates from developing or alienating the suit schedule property, till the disputes under the agreement dated 14-9-2003, are settled finally. It also obtained an order of temporary injunction in I.A. No. 137 of 2005 under Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C.3. The petitioner filed I.A. No. 760 of 2005 under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C, to reject the plaint. The basis for filing this application was that there exists a clause for resolution of the disputes between the parties through the medium of Arbitration and in fact notices were exchanged between the parties for appointment of such Arbitrator. This applica...
Chief Engineer, I.T.D.A., (Tw Dept.) and ors. Vs. Presiding Officer, I ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD756; 2005(5)ALT36
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. This writ petition is filed challenging the award of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam, (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in I.D. No.158 of 1991, dated 5-6-1993, whereby the Tribunal directed reinstatement of the 2nd respondent herein with back wages at Rs. 600/- per month till the date of reinstatement with continuity of service.2. The facts as referred to in the award of the Tribunal are as follows:The 2nd respondent-workman joined the services of the petitioners herein as temporary workman on 24-10-1987 at Paderu Tribal Werlfare Divisional Office. He was deputed to the Circle Office (Office of the Superintendent Engineer, Visakhapatnam), wherein he worked till 3-4-1991. He was transferred to Paderu and his services were terminated on 4-7-1991. The workman contended before the Tribunal that while he was paid Rs. 600/- per month, at the time of joining service, the same was later increased to Rs. 900/- per month and that he was...
Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Secunderabad Division Vs. M. Ramat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD368; 2005(6)ALT597
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. The appellant herein, the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (Secunderabad Division), the defendant in O.S. No. 1038 of 1986, on the file of the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, preferred the present appeal as against the judgment and the Degree made in the aforesaid suit dated 20-8-1993 partly decreeing the suit at Rs. 60,000/- with future interest at 6% per annum, from the date of decree till the date of realization.2. Smt. M. Jyothi Kiran, the learned Counsel representing the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, the appellant herein, would maintain that all the records were not placed before the Court and the respondent failed to establish that there was first floor, at the time of compromise in the Lok Adalat in the suit O.S. No. 2604 of 1985 and on a wrong impression and on improper appreciation of the evidence available on record, the said relief was granted and hence the same is liable to be set aside.3. The learned Counsel for the respon...
Jagjeevan Rao Vs. Government of A.P. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD386
ORDERK.C. Bhanu, J.1. The petitioner filed this writ petition with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in not including the name of the petitioner in the seniority list dated 26-6-2003 for the promotion to the post of Superintendent under 50% seniority quota as illegal and arbitrary.2. It is the case of the petitioner that initially he was appointed on consolidated emoluments on 27-11-1979 in the correspondence-cum contact programme for B.Ed. and M.Ed., college of Education, Osmania University based on the recommendations of the selection committee. In the year 1981 he was given regular scales of pay. On 9-6-1995 the petitioner was appointed to the Special Grade Scale of Senior Assistant on completion of 10 years service with effect from 1-4-1991. Later, he was given Special promotion on completion of 16 years of service and he has been serving the University since last 20 years. On 26-6-2003 the 2nd respondent university issued seniority list...
J.K. Associates Vs. B. Prameela Devi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD800; 2005(4)ALT504
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Plaintiff in O.S. No. 1137 of 2000, in the Court of the IV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, filed this revision, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, feeling aggrieved by an order passed by the trial Court, in an application filed under Section 11(2) of Andhra Pradesh Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act').2. The petitioner is a builder. It entered into an agreement with the respondents on 7-9-1997, for the purpose of developing the suit schedule property, by constructing multi-storied complex. Various terms and conditions were agreed upon. It is stated that a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- was paid to the respondents towards refundable deposit. In addition to that, petitioner claimed that it paid a sum of Rs. 80,000/- towards rent under the agreement. The possession of the property was to be delivered to the petitioner within a particular time, so as to enable it to commence construction. Alleging that the respond...
D. Sujata and anr. Vs. Revoori Vasantha and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ALD878; 2005(4)ALT626
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The defendants in O.S. No. 67 of 2003 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kamareddy, filed this revision aggrieved by the order, dated 15.12.2004, passed in I.A. No. 193 of 2004.2. The respondents filed the suit for recovery of certain amounts from the petitioners. The trial of the suit commenced. On behalf of P.W.1, an affidavit, in lieu of chief-examination was filed, on 15.4.2004, along with two documents, dated 9.5.1997 and 9.4.2000, respectively, titled as agreements. The trial Court marked them as Exs.A.3 and A.4.3. On 29.6.2004, the petitioners are said to have been furnished copies of the affidavit as well as documents. They filed I.A. No. 193 of 2004, on 2.7.2004, under Order 13 Rule 6 of C.P.C., with a prayer to reject the documents, marked as Exs.A.3 and A.4. Their contention was that the documents have the effect of creating interest in immovable property, and as such, they were required to be registered under Section 17 of the Registration ...
Budumuru Vijayalakshmi Vs. Ponnada Krishna Rao (Died) Per L.Rs.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD192; 2005(4)ALT625
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two Civil Revision petitions arise out of orders passed in two separate applications filed in O.S. No. 85 of 2001 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Rajam.2. The petitioner filed the suit against one Ponnada Krishna Rao for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale. Even before the trial of the suit was commenced, the sole defendant is said to have died. The petitioner states that she was neither informed the date of death, nor could she know the same, on account of the fact that she shifted her residence to Visakhapatnam. On coming to know about this development, she filed I.A. No. 602 of 2002 under Order XXII Rule 4 C.P.C. to set aside the abatement. Since, there was delay of 160 days in filing I.A. No. 602 of 2002, she filed I.A. No. 697 of 2002 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to condone the delay. Through its order, dated 12-6-2003, the trial Court dismissed I.A. No. 697 of 2002. On the ground that I.A. No...
Yelugula Subba Rao Vs. Perumalla Sri Ramakrishna Murthy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD101
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This second appeal is filed against the judgment in A.S. No. 37 of 1997 of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem, through which it reversed the judgment and decree, dated 14-5-1997, of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Tadepalligudem, in O.S. No. 129 of 1990.2. The 1st respondent filed the suit, initially, for the relief of perpetual injunction, restraining the appellant herein from interfering with his right of access by way of easement, for the purpose of ingress and egress from the plaint schedule property to the R & B road, through the road margin. Subsequently, the prayer for mandatory injunction for removal of pillars and restoration of the site to its normal position in R, R2, R6 and R7 portion of the road margin, was added. The 1st respondent contended that he purchased the suit schedule property under two separate sale deeds, dated 15-7-1974 and 24-5-1975, marked as Exs.A.1 and A.2, respectively. He pleaded that the western side of the ...
Self-financing Rural Engineering College Managements Association and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALT547
Bilal Nazki, A.C.J.1. There are six writ petitions and four writ appeals. The writ appeals arise out of an order passed by the learned Single Judge in one of the writ petitions being Writ Petition No. 3179 of 2005.2. The bone of contention in all these cases is a Memo issued by the State Government being Memo No. 10680/EC. 2/2004, dated 14-12-2004. Some of the writ petitioners support the Memo, whereas in some other writ petitions, this Memo has been challenged. Controversy revolves around this Memo. Since all the writ petitions and writ appeals raise same questions of law and fact, they were heard together and are being disposed of together by this common judgment.3. The impugned Memo communicated a decision of the government to its functionaries i.e. Director of Technical Education, Secretary, A.P. State Council of Higher Education and the Registrars of the Universities that it had decided not to consider establishment of new Engineering colleges in the State during the Academic year...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »