Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
Gounipuram Sivaji Raju (Died) and ors. Vs. Verragudi Narasimha Raju
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALT827
P.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court ordered notice before admission on 12-8-2005. Sri D. Sudershan Reddy, the learned Counsel entered appearance. Sri Veera Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the appellants had raised two substantial questions of law: (1) The relief of specific performance being discretionary in the facts and circumstances both the Courts erred in granting the said relief in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, and (2) the suit filed after a long lapse of time is barred by limitation.2. Sri Sudarshan Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the respondent - plaintiff would submit that as per the recitals in the Agreement of Sale in question nothing more had been left to be performed except the execution of a registered Sale Deed when a demand was made and inasmuch as at a particular point of time the refusal to execute the document had been detected by the plaintiff, from the said date within time the suit was instituted. The learned Counsel also would submi...
K.C. Kanniyappa Vs. K.C. Lalitha and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD370
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Revision petitioner is the first plaintiff in O.S. No. 47 of 1998 on the file of the Court of the I Additional District Judge, Nellore and is the defendant in O.S. No. 1141 of 2000 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nellore, which stood transferred to the Court of I Additional District Judge, Nellore, as per the order in transfer O.P.No. 151 of 2000 on the file of the District Court, Nellore, to be tried along with O.S.No. 47 of 1998 on the file of the Court of the I Additional District Judge, Nellore and was renumbered as O.S.No. 20 of 2003. During the course of joint trial when the first respondent herein, who is the second plaintiff in O.S.No. 47 of 1998 and the plaintiff is transfer O.S.No. 20 of 2003, filed her affidavit in lieu of chief examination, first defendant in O.S.No. 47 of 1998 (second respondent herein) who is not a party to O.S.No. 20 of 2003 filed a memo seeking permission of the Court to cross-examine her. Revisio...
Sangam Health Care Products Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2005
Reported in: [2006]144STC328(AP)
ORDERB. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S. Ravi, and the learned Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes and at their request the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.2. Rule nisi.3. The petitioner invokes the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to issue writ of certiorari by calling for the records in the impugned order, dated September 8, 2005, and quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, 'the VAT Act').4. The petitioner is a dealer engaged in the business of manufacture of intravenous infusion sets, ultra guard infusion sets and immu set infusion sets, etc.5. The first respondent herein issued impugned show cause notice dated July 29, 2005 which was actually signed on August 29, 2005, and the same was duly served on the petitioner on August ...
Gounipuram Krishna Moorthy Raju and anr. Vs. Yerragudi Narasimha Raju
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-2005
Reported in: AIR2006AP52
P.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court ordered notice before admission on 12-8-2005. Sri D. Sudershan Reddy, the learned Counsel entered appearance. Sri Veera Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the appellants had raised two substantial questions of law : 1) The relief of specific performance being discretionary in the facts and circumstances both the Courts erred in granting the said relief in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, and 2) the suit filed after a long lapse of time is barred by limitation.2. Sri Sudershan Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the respondent --plaintiff would submit that as per the recitals in the Agreement of Sale in question nothing more had been left to be performed except the execution of a registered Sale Deed when a demand was made and inasmuch as at a particular point of time the refusal to execute the document had been detected by the plaintiff, from the said date within time the suit was instituted. The learned Counsel also would submit...
K. Narender and anr. Vs. K. Mallesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD185
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. These two revisions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are directed against an order dated 22-2-2005 made in I.A. No. 42 of 2005 in O.S. No. 59 of 2000 on the file of the learned I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, wherein the petition filed under Section 114(a) read with Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure for reviewing the Order dated 3-11-2004 was allowed and thereby ordered that Exs.A84 and A85 can be marked as secondary evidence and objection raised by defendants 2 and 3 is not sustainable.2. Respondents 1 and 3 in the above I.A. are the petitioners in Civil Revision Petition No. 1207 of 2005, while respondent No. 2 is the petitioner in Civil Revision Petition No. 1441 of 2005. There is no necessity of going into all the details as of now.3. Respondent No. 1 (petitioner in the above LA.) filed a counter-affidavit stating inter alia that the civil revision petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India...
Chanumolu Radha Rani Vs. Thota Vishnu Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD458
C.V. Ramulu, J.1. The only question of law that arises for consideration in this second appeal is whether the Courts below were right in holding that whether the suit is barred by limitation under Article 54 of the Limitation Act, particularly when there is a pleading that the respondent-defendants have created mortgage on the plaint schedule property in favour of the Bank and the same has not been discharged and the Bank had filed the suit against the respondent-defendants ?2. The appellant presented plaint in OS No. Nil/98 (G.L.No. 5492/dated 12-10-1998) before the learned Junior Civil Judge, Nandigama seeking specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 21-10-1992. Along with the plaint, the agreement of sale and legal notices dated 5-7-1995 and 30-10-1995 were also filed. The notice dated 30-10-1995 is said to have been returned on 13-11-1995. However, the plaint was rejected on 27-10-1998 passing the following Order :'This plaint filed for numbering of the suit on the object...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sabia Begum and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2005
Reported in: II(2006)ACC692; 2005(6)ALT610; [2006(108)FLR1069]
R. Subhash Reddy, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the National Insurance Company Limited, under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, aggrieved by the award of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-IV, Hyderabad, passed in W.C. Case No. 104 of 2001.2. The respondents 1 to 6 herein were the applicants before the Tribunal below, claiming compensation under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, on account of death of one Sri Mohd. Saber. Applicant No. 1 is the wife, Applicant Nos. 2 to 5 are the children, and Applicant No. 6 is the mother, of the deceased; whereas, Opposite Party No. 1 was the owner of the lorry bearing registration No. AP.9T.8106, and also father of the deceased, and, Opposite Party No. 2 was the insurer of the said lorry. It was the case of the applicants before the Tribunal that the deceased was employed by the first Opposite Party as driver on the said vehicle and, on interveni...
Jarapala Deepala and ors. Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)818; 2006CriLJ267
ORDERP. Lakshmana Reddy, J.1. This revision is filed against the conviction and sentence recorded against the revision petitioners 1 to 6 in S.C. No. 128 of 1996, dated 31-12-1998 on the file of the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Eluru which was confirmed in Crl. A. No. 10 of 1999, dated 3-4-2003 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Eluru.2. The relevant facts in brief are as follows :The revision petitioners herein will hereinafter be referred as A-1 to A-6 in this revision. The Inspector of Police, Bhemadole Circle, Bheemadole filed this case before the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru alleging that on 6-9-1995 at about 9.00 p.m. PWs. 1 to 5 and another boarded the lorry bearing No. ABK-599 for which PW-6 is the driver and by the time the lorry reached near Dorasanipadu village at about 10.30 p.m. A-1 to A-6 clad in knickers and towels rounded to their waists armed with sticks came across the road, put stones across the road and stopped the lorry by pelting...
Makineni Madhuri Vs. Bollu Nagabhushanam and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD476; 2006(2)ALT191
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. When the vacate stay petition is taken up for hearing, learned Counsel for the parties requested to dispose of the main appeal itself and argued accordingly.2. The appellant/plaintiff preferred this appeal against the order of dismissal dated 7-12-2004 passed in I.A.No. 2019 of 2003 in O.S. No. 289 of 2003 by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Eluru.3. The appellant/plaintiff filed the above suit for partition of plaint schedule properties into 12 equal shares and allotment of one such share to her, for separate possession of the same and for mesne profits from the date of the suit till the date of delivery. The 1st defendant is her grand father, the 2nd defendant is her Senior Paternal Uncle, 3rd and 9th defendants are her parents, defendants 4 to 6 are her cousins and defendants 7 and 8 are her sisters. It is her case that the 1sl defendant, who inherited few acres of land and developed an estate consisting of several properties purchased in the name...
Regional Manager, Apsrtc Vs. H.S. Sudhindra Aras
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: AIR2006AP207; 2006(1)ALD31
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The respondent was granted a licence by the petitioner, in the year 1997, to run a canteen at Ramayampet Bus Stand. The licence was valid upto the year 2002. Some disputes persisted between the parties, as to the violation of conditions of licence. When the petitioner sought to cancel the licence, on the ground that the respondent violated the conditions, the respondent filed O.S.No. 10 of 2001. A decree was ultimately passed in that suit, granting injunction against the petitioner herein, to be operative, till the end of the licence period, i.e. 2002. Thereafter, the petitioner initiated steps for evicting the respondent. The respondent, in turn, filed O.S. No. 17 of 2003, in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Medak, for the relief of perpetual injunction. He also filed I.A. No. 296 of 2003, for temporary injunction. The trial Court allowed the I.A., through its order dated 1 1-6-2003. The petitioner filed C.M.A. No. 17 of 2003, in the Court of III Addition...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »