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.
Puttur Gram Panchayat Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD813
ORDERB. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. Puttur Gram Panchayat is the petitioner and it is represented by its Sarpanch. Conversion of Puttur Grampanchayath into Municipality is assailed in the writ petition. Consequently, cancellation of resolutions passed by the Grampanchayath opposing the upgradation of Grampanchayath to Municipality are also assailed in the writ petition.2. The Collector and District Magistrate-3rd respondent sent proposals regarding upgradation of Putur and surrounding eight Grampanchayats namely 1) Cherlopalli 2) Chinnarajukuppam 3) Radhapalem 4) Veerappareddipalem (Bathalavari Kandriga) 5) Namdimangalam and 6) Pillaripattu 7) Thimmapuram of Puttur Mandal and 8) Kondalcheruvu of Narayanavanam Mandal as Puttur municipality. He also furnished a brief gist of area, population, density, economic importance and other factors to substantiate the proposals for conversation of the Grampanchayats as Municipality. Thereupon, the Government issued Memo No. 2107/Pts-IV/A1/2005-1, date...
Susheela Partani Vs. Mukund Das Partani
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD57
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri M.V. Bharati, the learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner and Sri Ravindra Viswanath, the learned Counsel representing the respondent.2. The respondent herein - the landlord filed the eviction petition R.C. No. 251/96 on the file of IV Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad praying for eviction against the revision petitioner - the respondent in the R.C. - the tenant on the ground of wilful default. The learned Rent Controller on appreciation of the evidence of R.W.1 to R.W.3, Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.3 and Ex.B.1 to Ex.B.53 came to the conclusion that the ground of wilful default had been established and ordered eviction. Aggrieved by the same, the tenant carried the matter by way of appeal R.A.No. 27/2000 on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad - the Appellate Authority and the learned Appellate Authority on appreciation of the evidence available on record and the findings recorde by learned Rent Controller, confi...
Chita Narasimha Prasad, (A1) Ex. Manager, Andhra Bank Vs. Sub-inspecto ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)790; 2006CriLJ336
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 1306 of 1999 was preferred by A-1and Crl. A. No. 1364 of 1999 was preferred by A 2 in C. C. No. 15 of 1996 on the file of the Special Judge for C. B. I. Cases, Visakhapatnam. A-1 was charged for the offences under Sections 120-B, 420, 465, 471, and 477-A, I.P.C. and Section 13(1)(d)(ii) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'). A-2 was charged for the offences under Sections 120-B, 420 and 468, I. P. C. Both of them denied the respective charges and claimed for trial.2. The case of the prosecution is briefly as follows :A-1 worked as a Branch Manager and A-2 as a temporary Sweeper, in Andhra Bank, Nimmakuru Branch. During the year 1991-92, A-1 and A-2 entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat Andhra Bank and pursuance thereof, A-1 sanctioned and disbursed eight loans in the names of non-existing persons and misappropriated Rs. 85.000/- by drawing the amounts towards loans in the names of non-existing pers...
Kommuru Venkateswara Rao and anr. Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)ALD644; 2005(5)ALT680
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J. 1. The petitioners appeared in the ICET-2005 examination conducted by a centralized agency in the State for the purpose of selecting candidates for admission into 1st year MCA course in various universities in the State. They secured the ranks, 46012 and 60143 respectively. On the basis on their ranks, they could not get admission in the campus colleges of universities or Government institutions. They were also not found fit to be admitted against the seats in the private affiliated colleges, meant to be allotted by the Convener.2. Petitioners approached the 4th respondent, a college affiliated to Acharya Nagarjuna University, the 2nd respondent, seeking admission against the management quota. The 4th respondent admitted the petitioners, subject to the approval by the 2nd respondent.3. When it came to the question of approval of admissions made by the 4th respondent, the 2nd respondent took an objection in relation to petitioners on the ground that they were...
Narapareddy Bujjamma Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALD127; 2005(6)ALT235
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. After the petitioner purchased Ac.0.90 cents of land in Survey No. 304/2 of Chowta Bhimavaram Village from K. Tirupalu (fourth respondent), under a registered sale deed dated 26.5.1990 for Rs. 6,900/-, a notice in Form No. 1 of A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Rules, 1977 (for short 'the Rules') framed under A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 (for- short 'the Act') was issued to him by the Mandal Revenue Officer, (the third respondent), to show-cause why the said land, which is an assigned land, purchased by him cannot be taken possession of from him and reassigned to the fourth respondent. Petitioner sent his reply to that notice through his advocate on 3.1.1996. After considering the said reply third respondent by his order dated 5.2.1996 directed the Mandal Revenue Inspector to take possession of the land purchased by the petitioner and restore possession thereof to the fourth respondent. The said order of the third respon...
Waddera Bharathi Labour Contract (Civil) Co-operative Society Ltd. and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(6)ALT605
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. All the nine petitioners in this writ petition are Waddera Quarry Labour Contract Societies. Aggrieved by the E-Procurement Notice (Tender Notice) dated 24-8-2005 inviting tenders for certain works in Serilingampally Municipality, they filed the present writ petition. As per the Tender Notice, work Nos. 1, 5, 12, 18, 24, 27, 30, 33, 40, 54, 55 and 62 are reserved for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe or Waddera Societies. E-Procurement requires the intending bidders to submit their tenders in electronic form. Therefore, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondent to permit them to participate in the tenders by issuing tender schedules.2. There cannot be any denial that all the members of the Waddera Labour Cooperative Societies as well as Labour Societies formed with Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, as members cannot be expected to submit their tenders on E-Platform through e-mail route. Therefore, this Court directed the learned Standing Counsel to ge...
Vempalli Srinivasula Reddy Vs. V.M. Ramakrishna Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALT160
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Mahadeva, the counsel representing the revision petitioner and Sri Ramesh the learned counsel representing the respondents.2. This Court on 18-8-2005 ordered notice before admission and the interim stay was granted for a period of four weeks. The counsel representing the respondents had entered appearance and the Civil Revision Petition is heard at length and the same is being disposed of at the stage of admission.3. Sri Mahadeva, the learned counsel representing the revision petitioner, the plaintiff in O.S. No. 519 of 2002 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Proddutur would contend that the petitioner, as plaintiff filed I.A. No. 641 of 2005 in the said suit praying for amendment. The learned counsel would also contend that the petitioner filed the application praying for alteration of the plaint plan in view of the report of the Commissioner and the plan filed by the Commissioner. The learned counsel would also submit that this can be take...
B.K. Babu Rao (Died) by Lrs. and ors. Vs. A. Jayalaxmi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-06-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD65
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. Heard Sri Hari Haran the learned Counsel representing the appellants. Sri Shyam Sunder, the learned Counsel representing the Respondents No. 1 and 2 and Kumari Usha Kiran the learned Counsel representing Respondent No. 6.2. The unsuccessful plaintiffs in O.S. No. 1770 of 1989 on the file of the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad had preferred the present C.C.C.A. The 1st appellant died and appellants 7 to 13 were brought on record as legal representatives of the 1st appellant by order dated 9.8.2002 in C.M.P. No. 10997 of 2002. Likewise, the 2nd appellant died and appellant Nos. 14 to 16 were brought on record by virtue of order dated 26-7-2005 in CCCAMP No. 68 of 2005.3. The appellants herein the plaintiffs in the suit filed the suit for partition of the plaint 'A' and 'B' schedule properties and for rendition of accounts of the rents collected and also prayed for alternative relief of recovery of some amount with interest in lieu of 'B' schedule...
Sri Laxmi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. G.V. Mohan and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-06-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD607
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. Having regard to the divergence of opinion between the two Hon'ble Judges constituting the Bench, the matter has been referred to me by My Lord the Chief Justice.2. The facts of the case have been succinctly narrated by my Learned Sister Justice T. Meena Kumari. I have had the advantage of going through both the judgments written by the learned Judges. Having regard to the same, there is no need for me to reiterate the facts in extenso except mentioning the same wherever necessary to elucidate the point in controversy.3. It is expedient to refer the parties, as they are originally arrayed in the suit so as to avoid confusion. The plaintiff filed the suit O.S. No. 118 of 2003 for specific performance of the suit agreement of sale dated 9-12-1980. The defendants 1 and 2 resisted the suit by filing a written statement. Subsequently they filed an interlocutory application in LA.No. 3665 of 2003 in O.S.No. 118 of 2003 under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil P...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Arihant Enterprises
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-06-2005
Reported in: (2008)11VST341(AP)
S. Ananda Reddy, J.1. The State of Andhra Pradesh preferred this revision aggrieved by the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in T.A. No. 1027 of 2004, dated January 31, 2005 under which the order of competent authority, as confirmed by the first appellate authority of the acquisition proceedings under Section 28A of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was set aside.2. The respondent--M/s. Arihant Enterprises is a registered dealer on the rolls of the Commercial Tax Officer, M.J. Market Circle, Abids Division, Hyderabad. The respondent was carrying on business in plywood and decorative laminates. During the assessment year 2003-04, the jurisdictional Commercial Tax Officer noticed that the turnovers, reported by the respondent-dealer in its returns, are too low and are not matching with the huge quantities of goods the dealer was purchasing and selling, therefore, it was suspected that ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »