Andhra Pradesh Court October 2006 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.
Guguloth Swarupa and ors. Vs. A.P.S.R.T.C. Rep. by Its Managing Direct ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2222; 2006(6)ALD703; 2006(6)ALT457; [2007(112)FLR890]
G. Chandraiah, J.1. Heard both the counsel.2. Aggrieved by the award dated 28.1.1999 passed by the court of Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Warangal in M.V.O.P. No. 226 of 1998 the claimants filed the present appeal.3. The 1st claimant is the wife of the deceased. Claimants 2 and 3 are the minor children of the deceased and claimant No. 4 is the mother of the deceased. Their case in brief is that the deceased was working as driver of the jeep in the office of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Mahabubabad and was drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 3,200/-. The deceased was deputed to attend photo identity duty at Kothaguda-Gudur and was directed to proceed in the jeep bearing No. AP-36-G belonging to the State Government. On 28.10.1995 the deceased attended the duty and proceeded to Kothaguda and Gudur mandals and completed his work and he was directed to report back to the M.R.O. Mahabubabad on 28.10.1995 and while coming back to Mahabubabad along with some...
Adapala Subbaiah Vs. Shaik Hasan Saheb
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(4)ALD196; 2007(4)ALT541
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Appellant filed the suit against respondent for recovery of value of 14 bags of paddy, alleging that the respondent, during the year 1980-81, took his land of an extent of Acs.2-00 cents in S.No.305/B of Mukteswaram village, on lease agreeing to pay the rent at 14 bags of paddy per year and failed to pay the same and vacated the land during the next agricultural year i.e. 1981-82. The case of the respondent is that he did not take the land of appellant on lease and that the suit filed only as a counter blast to the suit filed by him for recovery of a debt due under promissory note from the appellant.2. In support of his case, the appellant, besides examining himself as P.W.1, examined five other witnesses as P.Ws.2 to 6 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.3. In support of his case the respondent, besides examining himself as D.W.1, examined two other witnesses as D.Ws.2 and 3 and marked Ex.B.1. The trial Court found favour with the case of the appellant and passed a decree in...
Mohd. Abbas Ali Vs. Masood BIn Mohammed Al-khaili and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD60
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri Vedula Venkataramana, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri A.Ravi Shankar, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1 and also the learned Advocate General, on Court notice.2. The petitioner, who is an unsuccessful claim petitioner, files this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure assailing the orders rejecting an application filed by him purporting to be under Order XXI Rule 58 of the CPC setting up a claim, as per the orders in E.A. No. 224 of 2001 in E.P. No. 86 of 1999 in O.S. No. 873 of 1998 dated 23.4.2004 on the file of the I Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, which are not in dispute, are that the respondent No. 1 herein is a decree-holder, who filed the present execution petition on 31.3.1999 in pursuance of a decree obtained in a suit seeking for specific performance of the agreement of sale said to have been executed by the r...
Pittala Kistaiah Vs. Smt. Ganta Laxmi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD81; 2007(4)ALT327
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The unsuccessful 1st respondent in AS No. 41 of 1994 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, being aggrieved of the reversing Judgment and decree of OS No. 737 of 1987 on the file of Principal District Munsif, Karimnagar, challenged the same by way of Second Appeal.2. This Court on 10.6.1997 made the following order:Admit.The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration in the above Second Appeal:c) Whether a decree for perpetual injunction can be granted against a co-owner?d) Whether an unregistered gift deed is valid for the establishment of possession and title over the suit property?f) Whether the relief of perpetual injunction can be granted to the parties who have no title or interest over the property?3. Sri Y. Rama Rao, learned Counsel representing the appellant-1st defendant made the following submissions:The learned Counsel would submit that the reasons recorded by the Court of first instance are just and proper reasons a...
Mohd. Abbas Ali Vs. Masood BIn Mohd. Al Khaili and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALT164
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri Vedula Venkataramana, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri A. Ravi Shankar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1 (sic. 2) and also the learned Advocate General, on Court notice.2. The petitioner, who is an unsuccessful claim petitioner, files this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure assailing the orders rejecting an application filed by him purporting to be under Order XXI Rule 58 of the CPC setting up a claim, as per theordersinE.A.No. 224 of 2001 in E.P.No. 86 of 1999 in O.S.No. 873 of 1998 dated 23-4-2004 on the file of the I Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, which are not in dispute, are that the respondent No. 1 herein is a decree-holder, who filed the present execution petition on 31-3-1999 in pursuance of a decree obtained in a suit seeking for specific performance of the agreement of sale said to have been executed by t...
Chintalapati Madhusudhana Sarma Vs. Katti Sambrajyamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD486; 2007(4)ALT706
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The appellant filed O.S. No. 434 of 1986 in the Court of the I Additional District Munsif Magistrate, Guntur, against the respondents, for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale, dated 4-7-1973, and for consequential injunction. He pleaded that the mother of Respondents 1 and 2, by name Pullamma, executed the agreement of sale, for transferring an extent of 500 Sq. yards described, in the suit schedule, for a consideration of Rs. 3,250/- and a sum of Rs. 900/- was paid as advance on the date of agreement i.e., on 4-7-1973. It was pleaded that further sums of Rs. 400/- each, were paid on two occasions and that he was waiting for necessary clearance, to be obtained from the Government, by Pullamma, for the purpose of execution of the sale deed.2. The appellant got issued a notice, dated 10-5-1986, Ex.A-5, stating inter alia that even while the agreement is subsisting, Respondents 3 and 4 started claiming that they have purchased the suit sched...
Polamraju Rama Seshagiri Rao and anr. Vs. Chennapagada Venkata Naga Sa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(4)ALD62
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Defendants 1 and 3 in O.S. No. 42 of 1983 in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Bapatla, filed this second appeal, aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Court of I Additional District Judge, Guntur, in A.S. No. 157 of 1988.2. The 2nd appellant is the daughter of the 1st appellant. The 1st appellant and the 2nd respondent are sons of one Sri Subbaraya Sarma. Subbaraya Sarma had a brother, by name, Raghavaiah. The 1st respondent is the daughter of Raghavaiah and the 2nd respondent is said to have been given in adoption to him in the year 1947.3. The 1st respondent filed the suit for the relief of declaration of title and perpetual injunction, or in the alternative for recovery of possession, in respect of the suit schedule property, admeasuring Acs. 1.03 cents. She pleaded that the suit property was held byher father, later Raghavaiah, and after his death in the year 1949, the 2nd respondent, who was adopted by her father, treated the suit schedule prop...
Norman Swaroop Issac Vs. State Bank of India and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2006
Reported in: AIR2007AP40; 2006(6)ALD689
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. The petitioner is an employee of State Bank of India. While working as Middle Manager Grade Service-Ill in the 2nd respondent branch, he was placed under suspension with effect from 16-11-2005 under Rule 68(A)(1) of State Bank of India Officers' Service Rules pending disciplinary proceedings initiated against him on the allegation of involvement in a major fraud of about Rs. 6 crores. It is also not in dispute that the alleged fraud is being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) which is still pending.2. It is pleaded by the petitioner that on 4-11-2005 the Deputy General Manager, Zonal Office, Hyderabad had visited the petitioner's house along with Assistant General Manager-II, Zonal Office, Hyderabad and asked him to handover his passport bearing No. B0283300 stating that the same would be returned as and when needed by him. Accordingly, the petitioner handed over the passport to him which is kept in the custody of the 2nd respondent. While so...
Mada Venkata Mutyala Rao Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD73; 2007(1)ALT213
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The matter is appearing under interlocutory. Counter-affidavit filed by Respondent No. 3. At the request of Counsel on record, the writ petition is being disposed of finally.2. The writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not incorporating the questionnaire submitted by the petitioner as provided under Section 122 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (hereinafter be referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience) in the agenda of the meeting scheduled to be held on 19-10-2006 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the Act and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 to incorporate the questionnaire submitted by the co-opted members as provided under Section 122 of the Act in the agenda of the meetings and pass such other suitable orders.3. Sri Chidambaram, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner had taken this Court through the averments made in the affidavit ...
Patnana Venkataramana Vs. Mutnuru Venkataramana
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD104; IV(2007)BC526
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The respondent filed O.S. No. 243 of 2003 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Bobbili, against the petitioner, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 51,600/-. After contest by the petitioner herein, the trial Court decreed the suit on 15-9-2004. The decree became final, since the petitioner did not prefer any appeal. Thereupon, the respondent filed E.P. No. 1 of 2005 under Rule 37 of Order XXI CPC, stating that despite possessing adequate means, the petitioner did not pay the decretal amount. He ultimately prayed for the arrest of the petitioner. After following the procedure prescribed, the trial Court allowed the E.P. on 5-12-2005, recording a finding to the effect that despite possessing adequate means, the petitioner did not pay the decretal amount and ultimately directed his detention in civil prison. The same is challenged in this civil revision petition.2. Sri K. Subrahmanyam, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that except making a vagu...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »