Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
M. Parveen Banu Vs. Collector and District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT219
ORDERBilal Nazki, Acting C.J.1. Heard learned counsel for parties.2. In this Writ Petition, the order passed by the District Collector, purportedly under Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Anti-Social and Hazardous Activities Act, 1980 (for short 'the Act'), was challenged. It appears that the husband of the writ petitioner was externed by virtue of an order passed by the Collector in terms of Section 3 of the Act. During the period of externment, again he came back to the territory from which he was ordered to be externed. He was arrested by the police and produced before the Collector, who passed the impugned order. The District Magistrate, without even giving a chance to the petitioner's husband to defend himself convicted the detenu under Section 10 of the Act, sentenced him to six months rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 1,000/-.3. We are surprised to note that an Officer of the status of a Collector and the District Magistrate is not aware even the basic...
Namburi Chenna Reddy and ors. Vs. Devireddy Kotareddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD493; 2006(2)ALT369
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This revision presents an instance of undue delay on the part of the Court, even to dispose of the I.A. filed under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, resulting in prejudice to both the parties.2. The petitioner herein filed O.S. No. 280 of 1986 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kavali, against the respondents herein for perpetual injunction. The trial of the suit commenced sometime in the year 1981. PW.1 was examined as a witness. PW.2 was examined in chief and his cross-examination was due on 31-10-1991. A representation was made on that day on behalf of the respondents that their Counsel went to the District Head Quarters to conduct a Sessions Case and they submitted an application seeking adjournment. The trial Court passed an order on that day itself rejecting the request, setting the respondents ex-parte and decreed the suit as prayed for.3. Soon thereafter, the respondents filed I.A.No. 11 of 1992, under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, to set aside the ex-parte ...
B. Bala Seshanna Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD727; 2005(5)ALT637
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner assails the orders dated 9.12.2004 passed by first respondent herein whereby and whereunder orders passed by second respondent were stayed pending consideration of revision petition filed under Clause 21 of A.P. State Public Distribution System Control Order 2001 (2001 Control Order) against orders of second respondent. The order is assailed mainly on the ground that fourth respondent, who is a temporary fair price shop dealer of U. Bollavaram Village has no locus standi to invoke the revisional jurisdiction of first respondent. Strong reliance is placed on a decision in Alapati Soma Sekhar v. Collector, Krishna District, : 2003(3)ALD62 .2. The fact of the matter, in brief, may be noticed. The petitioner was appointed as fair price shop dealer of U. Bollavaram Village sometime prior to 1975. Third respondent herein suspended the authorization on 10.8.2001 on the allegations that he was absent on 1.8.2001 at the time of inspection, that he diverted t...
V. Laxmaiah and ors. Vs. Mandal Revenue Officer and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALT647
ORDERBilal Nazki, A.C.J.1. The petitioners claim that the tree existing in the village from long time is being used for some religious purposes, therefore, it should not be cut. The Gram Panchayat has filed a counter-affidavit, in which they have stated that this tree is not being used for any religious purposes and the Gram Panchayat has passed a resolution on 05-06-2005 to remove the age-old tree as it was in a dilapidated condition and necessary clearances were brought from the Forest Department. The Gram Panchayat was of the opinion that since the tree was in a dilapidated condition, it is dangerous as it could naturally also fall at any time and cause damage to the person and property. It is also submitted in the counter that some other person in the village also filed a writ petition being W.P.No. 21760 of 2002, in which he claimed that the tree belongs to him. That writ petition has already been dismissed. Some of the villagers also filed a suit which is pending before the civil...
D. Malleswara Rao Vs. Andhra Bank and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD838; 2005(6)ALT614
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in treating the letter of the petitioner as resignation letter and not extending the benefit of pension as per the Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1985 (for short 'the Regulations') as arbitrary, capricious and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to extend the benefits under the Pension Scheme.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he joined the respondent-Bank as a Clerk in November, 1946 and promoted as Grade III Officer in 1966 and further promoted to the post of Scale IV Officer in February, 1986. While working as Scale IV Officer, he made an application seeking permission for voluntary retirement on medical grounds. Thereafter, he was paid retirement benefits of Rs. 1,02,142.80. While so, the Government issued the Regulations, which came into force from 29-9-1995. As per the said Regulations, the ...
A.S. Narasimham Vs. Industrial Tribunal-cum-labour Court and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD738; 2005(5)ALT690; [2005(107)FLR1103]
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the workman being aggrieved by the Award dated 26-2-1999 made in I.D. No. 238 of 1995 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Anantapur, wherein the claim petition filed by the workman under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') was dismissed.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed to look after the sales promotion work with effect from 19-5-1986 in the 2nd respondent-company. He was subsequently promoted as a Salesman with effect from 10-5-1989. Thereafter, his services were terminated illegally with effect from 21-9-1993. On a representation made by him, he was reappointed as a Sales Representative in the respondent-company by letter dated 23-12-1993 and he was put on probation for six months. On 20-10-1994 a letter was said to have been issued extending his probation. However, on 15-11-1994 he was issued with a letter stating that his probation was extended fo...
Singam Satyanarayana and ors. Vs. Election Officer and Deputy Chief Ex ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALT1
ORDERJ. Chelameswar, J.1. These four writ appeals arise out of a common order dated 7-7-2005 of a learned Judge of this Court in W.P.Nos.18357 of 2004,407,426 and 2471 of 2005. The parties are the same in the last three of the above mentioned four writ petitions whereas in the 1st writ petition only five of the said parties are parties.2. The facts leading to this litigation are as follows:The petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner') in the last of the above three writ petitions i.e., Palle Sitaramulu Goud and the respondents 4 to 8 in the above mentioned three writ petitions (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondents') were elected as members of the Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituencies of Shameerpet Mandal on 3-7-2001. Under the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short 'the Act'), Panchayats a defined expression under Article 243(d) at various levels as contemplated under Article 243B are created. One of them being Mandal Parishad defined under sub-sec...
Harijana Chinna Narasimhulu and ors. Vs. Harijana Estheramma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD245; 2006(3)ALT184
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The defendant in OS No. 784 of 2002, on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool. This second appeal is filed aggrieved by the reversing judgment and Decree passed by the Court of the V Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Kurnool in AS No. 109 of 2003.2. The respondent filed the suit for the relief of declaration of title and for permanent injunction in respect of the area marked as 'CDEF' in the plaint sketch. She pleaded that she was initially assigned a Plot No. 62 (old 64) in Bapuji Nagar, Kurnool in the year 1977, and that she raised certain structures in an open area infront of the plot. It was alleged that the appellants who are the immediate neighbours on the northern side have raised an objection for that and two suits being OS No. 116 of 1995 and OS No. 196 of 1996 came to be filed in the Court of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge in relation thereto. She pleaded that when her claim, vis-a-vis, the said portion of the lan...
Katta Naga Malleshwari Vs. Katta Vasantha Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALT698
D.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner/appellant.2. CMAMP No. 1610 of 2005 is filed by the petitioner/appellant to condone the delay of 3432 days in filing the appeal.3. The grounds in brief as stated in the affidavit filed by the appellant are that subsequent to the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court dissolving the marriage between the parties to the O.P.No. 127 of 1994, there was settlement outside the Court and accordingly both the parties started living together since 1999.4. The respondent/husband to this appeal is physically present before the Court and he also filed an affidavit stating inter alia that 'It is submitted that in the year 1999 we have realized that there is no meaning in leading lonely life and suffering the only child. Ultimately we settled our differences and have decided to live together. After our reunion we had a son in the year 2000 where in my wife's medical record I have clearly mentioned fatherhood of our newbo...
Kotla Srinivas Reddy and ors. Vs. Danya Bashaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD861; 2005(6)ALT822
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Plaintiffs in O.S.No. 122 of 1998, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Ibrahimpatnam, R.R. District, are the appellants. They challenge the judgment and decree dated 21-7-2003 passed in that suit, as well as the judgment and decree dated 3-2-2004, passed by the First Additional District Judge, R.R. District, in A.S.No. 87 of 2003.2. The appellants claimed that they have purchased the suit schedule property, through a sale deed dated 21-5-1992, marked as Ex.A-10. They complained that though the respondents do not have any claim over the suit schedule property, they started interfering with the possession, and sought the relief of perpetual injunction.3. The respondents pleaded that the appellants were never in possession of the suit schedule land, either before or subsequent to the purchase under Ex.A-3, and that they themselves have been in possession to it, as tenants, for the past 40 years. It was also pleaded that the appellants filed O.S.No. 38 of 1993, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »