Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.
P. Malleswaramma Vs. P. Prathap Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2005
Reported in: AIR2006AP4; 2005(5)ALD512; 2005(5)ALT319
D.S.R. Varma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order passed in O.P.No. 6717 of 1991 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kurnool, which was filed under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking a decree of divorce. The trial Court on 30.6.1992 allowed the said O.P., and thereby dissolved the marriage of the petitioner/husband with the respondent//wife by granting a decree of divorce. Aggrieved by the same, appellant/ wife preferred this appeal.2. For the sake of convenience, parties to this appeal are referred to as they were arrayed before the trial Court in the Original Petition.3. The facts, which are not in dispute, are that the couple got married in the year 1981 and they lived together for about nine years. Afterwards it seems there arose differences, as a result, wife and husband started living separately.4. Be that as it may, husband filed O.P.No. 6717 of 1991 seeking decree of divorce on the ground that he was being denied right of conjugal society by hi...
Union of India (Uoi), Rep. by the General Manager, South Central Railw ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2005
Reported in: III(2006)ACC652; 2006ACJ1470; AIR2005AP444; 2005(5)ALT541
V. Eswaraiah, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, in O.A.A. No. 60 of 1998 dated 10-11-1998, the Union of India represented by its General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad, filed this appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.2. Respondent herein is the claimant who filed the said claim application on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal. The parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in the said claim application.3. It is the case of the applicant that on 3-6-1993 with a view to go to Secunderabad from Palasa, for contract coolie work, he along with his mother and other members went to Palasa Railway Station, which is nearest to their native village, Ganguvada and purchased tickets. All of them boarded the train No. 2119 Bhubaneshwar-Secunderabad Konark Express in a general compartment. As there was heavy rush, the applicant and his mother was standing in the compartment near the door holding the...
Akkala Durga Rao Vs. Manikonda Durga Anjaneyulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALT509
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The unsuccessful tenant, being aggrieved of the reversing orders, filed these C.R.Ps. C.R.P.No. 3095/2001 is filed by Akkala Durga Rao and no doubt, it is stated that Akkala Durga Rao in his individual capacity cannot pray for permission to deposit rents inasmuch as M/s. Suvarna Iron & Steel Traders, rep. by its managing partner Sri Akkala Durga Rao is the tenant. The other 2 C.R.Ps., are filed by M/s. Suvarna Iron & Steel Traders, rep. by its managing partner Sri Akkala Durga Rao. Akkala Durga Rao in his individual capacity filed R.C.C.No. 111/93 on the file of Rent Controller, Vijayawada, praying for permission to deposit rents from March, 1993 onwards into Court and before the learned Rent Controller none of the parties were examined but however the learned Rent Controller allowed the petition granting permission to the petitioner to deposit rents @ Rs. 300/- per month without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and also directed the parties to...
State Bank of India Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD104; (2006)IILLJ29AP
ORDERK.C. Bhanu, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the Order No. L-12012/ 176/2003-IR(B-1) dated 10.9.2003 and Order No. L-12012/176/2004-IR(B.1) dated 21.2.2005 of the 1st respondent as illegal and arbitrary.2. The case of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent who joined the Bank in 1965 as Clerk and later deputed to manage the affairs of Staff Co-operative Consumer Stores, Vijayawada, remained unauthorisedly absent from 29.10.1985 to 31.10.1986, 8.12.1986 to 13.12.1986 and 21.7.1987 to 31.7.1987. There were allegations of misappropriation of funds against the 3rd respondent and after an elaborate enquiry he was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1,02,160-90 ps together with interest. Again he was unauthorisedly absent from duty from 1.1.1988 without any explanation and therefore he was treated as voluntarily vacated his service w.e.f. 9.5.1988 under Para XVI of the IV Bipartite Settlement dated 17.9.1984 and accordingly notice was served on him on 2.4.1988, which ...
Mahaveer Hospital and Research Centre Vs. Alladi Suvarnamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: 2007ACJ851; 2005(5)ALD534
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. The first defendant in O.S. No. 1238 of 1988 on the file of the V Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, Mahaveer Hospital and Research Centre, filed the present appeal as against the judgment and decree dated 13-9-1995 made in the aforesaid suit. 2. The plaintiff in the said suit is shown as 1st respondent and the 7th defendant-doctor, who had operated the patient, is shown as the 2nd respondent in the present appeal.3. Heard Smt. K. Udayasree, learned Counsel representing the appellant-first defendant, Sri Narayana Rao learned Counsel representing the first respondent-plaintiff and Sri Subramanayam Reddy, learned Counsel representing the 2nd respondent-7th defendant.4. Smt. K. Udayasree learned Counsel representing the appellant had taken this Court through the respective pleadings of the parties, the evidence of PW.1 and DWs.1. and 2 and also Ex.A1 to A19 and B1 to B4 and would contend that it is not a case of medical negligence since the suit was dismis...
Ch. Vijaya Raju Vs. Superintendent Engineer (Operation) Apseb and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD561; 2005(5)ALT791
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J. 1. The order of the 2nd respondent-Appellate Authority, dated 9.7.1993 confirming the order of the 1st respondent-disciplinary authority dated 18.11.1992, whereby the petitioner was imposed the punishment of dismissal from service, is the subject-matter of challenge in this writ petition.2. Brief facts, relevant for the purpose of this writ petition, are that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds in the A.P. State Electricity Board in the year 1981. He was posted as Revenue Cashier in the Electricity revenue office of the A.P.S.E.B. at Yemmiganur in 1990. It is his case that his job involved collection of bill amounts from customers at Yemmiganur and nearby villages covered by the Electricity Revenue Office and to remit the amounts, so collected, to the Electricity Revenue Office of the APSEB. It is stated in the affidavit, filed in support of the writ petition, that as part of his duty of collecting the bill amounts from different customers ...
Ranghothan Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)193; 2005CriLJ3650
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the accused officer (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') in C.C. No. 23 of 1992 on the file of the Additional Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases-cum-Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.2. The appellant, worked as a Village Assistant of Yacharam Mandal of Ranga Reddy District. He was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-on each count and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months for allegedly demanding and accepting Rs. 300/- as illegal gratification for doing an official favour to the complainant -- P.W. 1. The appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of the trial Court dated 19-9-1997 preferred this appeal challenging its validity and legality.3. The case of the prosecution leading to the convic...
Meet Road Lines Vs. United India Insurance Company and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: AIR2005AP485
P.S. Narayana, J.1. 3rd defendant in O.S. No. 5/98 on the file of Additional District Judge, Adilabad had preferred the present Appeal. Respondents 1 and 2 herein are the plaintiffs in the suit and respondents 3 and 4 are defendants 1 and 2. The suit was filed for recovery of damages of Rs. 1,34,850/- together with costs. The learned Judge recorded the evidence of P.W.-1 and D.W.-1, marked Exs. A.-1 to A-26 and on appreciation of the evidence available on record, decreed the suit as against all the defendants. Defendants 1 and 2 had not carried the matter by way of Appeal. The 3rd defendant being aggrieved of the Judgment and decree had preferred the present Appeal.2. Submission of Sri B. V. Ram Mohan Rao : The learned Counsel representing the appellant/3rd defendant Sri B. V. Rama Mohan Rao had argued in elaboration on the aspect of the privity of contract, the cause of action and the quantum of damages to be awarded in the light of the evidence available on record and the report of t...
S.K. Sharma Vs. A. Viswanath
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD119; 2006(3)ALT478
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This revision is preferred by the tenant under Section 22 of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, hereinafter in short referred to as 'Act' for the purpose of convenience, aggrieved by the reversing order made in R.A. No. 8/99 on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad. Respondent herein, petitioner in RC. No. 779/94 on the file of IV Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad filed eviction petition praying for the relief on the grounds of Section 10(3)(b)(iii)(a) proviso (c) bona fide personal requirement, mala fide denial of title, material alterations and unlawful activities. The learned Rent Controller on appreciation of the evidence of PW-1 and RW-1 and Exs.A-1 to A-17 and Exs.B-1 to B-82 dismissed the R.C. by order dated 2-12-1998. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner in R.C./respondent in the present civil revision petition, hereinafter referred to as 'landlord' filed R.A. No. 8/99 on the file of Additi...
Narmada Enterprises and anr. Vs. State of A.P. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)736; II(2007)BC45; 2005CriLJ4492
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Since both the petitions are interconnected they are being disposed of by a common order.2. Second respondent in these petitions filed complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act') against the petitioners in connection with the dishonour of the cheques issued by the second petitioner on behalf of the first petitioner, alleging that in spite of statutory notice of intimation of dishonour with demand for payment of the amounts covered by the dishonoured cheques being issued, petitioners did not pay the amounts covered by the dishonoured cheques. After service of summons, in the cases, petitioners filed petitions seeking discharge alleging that immediately after dishonour of the cheques in the first instance, second respondent sent a fax message about the, dishonour and so cause of action of initiation of proceedings under Section 138 of the Act arose on issuance of the fax message and since the fact that the cheques ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »