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.
Vinod Baid Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-2006
Reported in: [2007]139CompCas324(AP); [2007]78SCL313(AP)
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. Seeking to have the proceedings in STC No. 146 of 2001, on the file of the Special Judge for Economic Offences, Nampally, Hyderabad, quashed, this criminal petition is filed by the 3rd accused. The complaint, in STC No. 146 of 2001, was filed by the Registrar of Companies, A.P., Hyderabad on 21-8-2001, under Section 113(2) of the Companies Act, for contravention of the provisions of Section 113(1) of the Companies Act.2. The 1st accused in STC No. 146 of 2001, is a Public Limited Company and accused 2 to 5 are its Directors and are officers in default during the relevant period when the offence was committed. It is alleged, in the complaint filed in STC No. 146 of 2001, that the office of the complainant had received letter dated 1-8-2000, along with certain investor complaints, from the Department of Company Affairs, New Delhi. It was thereupon noticed that the company had failed to comply with the provisions of Section 113(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 i...
Dhannuri Venkata Ramanamma and anr. Vs. Dhannuri Satyanarayana
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD463
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Palivela Satyaraja Babu, learned Counsel representing the appellants and Sri Hari Sridhar, Advocate representing Sri Muddu Vijai, learned Counsel for the respondent.2. Both the Counsel made submissions at length touching the merits and demerits of the matter. However, both the Counsel also pointed out to Paragraph No. 17 of the judgment made in A.S. No. 109 of 1992 on the file of learned District Judge, Khammam.3. The appellants herein are plaintiffs in O.S. No. 160 of 1989 on the file of learned Subordinate Judge, Kothagudem. The suit was filed by the plaintiffs for the relief of perpetual injunction in relation to the suit schedule property at Kumaraswamigudem, hamlet of Marrigudem of Kunavaram Mandal. It is not in serious controversy that the plaint schedule property falls within the agency area. The Court of first instance having recorded the evidence of P.W.I and D.W.I and marking Exs. A. l, A. 2 and Ex. B. l decreed the suit and aggrieved by the same...
Mandala Simhachalam and ors. Vs. Neduru Trinath and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-2006
Reported in: II(2007)ACC48; 2007(3)ALD56
N.V. Ramana, J.1. Aggrieved by the award dated 27-10-2000, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vizianagaram, awarding a sum of Rs. 89,597/- as against their claim of Rs. 2,00,000/- the appellants-claimants filed this appeal.2. On account of the death of one Mandala Janardhana Rao in a road accident that occurred on 30-11-1997 when the bus belonging to APSRTC bearing No.AEZ 5890 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner hit him, his legal heirs, namely his wife, three children and mother, filed claim petition claiming a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- from APSRTC and its driver. The driver of the bus remained ex parte. APSRTC contested the claim. However, the Tribunal considering the evidence placed on record, held that the accident occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver, and awarded a sum of Rs. 89,597/-, which according to the claimants is very meager.3. The learned Counsel for the appellants-claimants submitted that the deceased was ...
Pulugu Karnakar Reddy and anr. Vs. Shreya Financiers and Hire Purchase ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD254; 2007(2)ALT212; [2007(112)FLR1155]
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court ordered Notice before admission returnabfe in six weeks on 28-4-2006 and the learned Counsel for petitioners was permitted to take out personal notice to the 1sl respondent and to file proof of service and interim stay was granted for a period of eight weeks.2. Sri Section Chalapathi Rao, the learned Counsel entered appearance.3. Sri P. Hari Prasad, the learned Counsel representing Sri Pamulaparthy Sadasiva Rao, the learned Counsel representing the petitioners would maintain that the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal had erred in ordering attachment before judgment under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter in short referred to as 'Code') relating to the Provident Fund and L.I.C. policy amounts. The learned Counsel also had drawn the attention of this Court to Section 60 of the Code and Section 10 of the Employees Provident Fund (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1952, (hereinafter in short referred to as 'Ac...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Rep. by Its Divisional Manager Vs. Sm ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2321; 2007(4)ALD495; 2007(1)ALT107
D.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard both sides.2. Since the issue involved being same and all the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals arise out of a common order and decrees, dated 05.10.1998, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Guntur (for brevity 'the Tribunal'), in M.V.O.P.Nos. 188, 318 and 319 of 1994, respectively, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the same by this common judgment.3. The United India Insurance Company Limited (for brevity 'the insurer') has filed the appeals C.M.A.Nos. 435, 469 and 556 of 1999, under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity 'the Act'), against the common order and decrees, dated 05.10.1998, passed by the Tribunal, in M.V.O.P.Nos. 318, 188 and 319 of 1994, respectively; while the claimants have filed the appeals C.M.A.Nos. 968 and 974 of 1999, under Section 173(1) of the Act against the common order and decrees, dated 05.10.1998, passed by the Tribunal, in M.V.O.P.Nos. 319 and 318 of 1994, respectively.4. The factual...
Vidadala Maruthi Hari Prasad Rao Alias Maruthi Prasad Vs. Special Judg ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ710
Gopalakrishna Tamada, J.1. This appeal is directed against the complaint filed by the learned Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, Vijayawada, under Section 340 read with Section 195(1)(b) Cr.P.C., which was registered as C.C. No. 472 of 2001 on the file of the V- Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, for punishing the appellant-accused of the offence under Section 193 of I.P.C.2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was the decoy and was examined as P.W.1 in C.C. No. 11 of 1996 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, Vijayawada, and at his instance a trap has been arranged and in the alleged trap one Kethavath Kasana Naik @ Kasana (accused-officer in the said case) was charged for the offence under Sections 7, 13(1)(d)(ii) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'P.C. Act'). It appears immediately after the trap, Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the appellant-Ex.P6 was recorded by the learned VIII Metropolitan ...
Omar Khasim Vs. Dabburi Madhusudhana Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD299
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. This civil revision petition is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.7.2003 passed in R.C.A. No. 1 of 1998 by the Rent Control Appellate Authority-cum-Senior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram confirming the order dated 28.10.1997 passed in R.C.C. No. 3 of 1994 by the Rent Controller cum Principal District Munsif, Vizianagaram.2. Petitioner herein is the tenant and the respondent is the landlord in respect of the house bearing Door No. 16-1-53-54, Municipal Assessment No. 6232 in T.S. No. 36 situated on the southern row of buildings to the Mahatma Gandhi Road, Vizianagaram - hereinafter referred to as the petition schedule premises.3. The landlord filed R.C.C. No. 3 of 1994 seeking eviction of the tenant on the ground of wilful default in payment of rents under Section 10(2)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act') for the months March to May 1994. The said petition was allowed by order dated 28.10...
Somu Adinarayana Vs. Balanagu Subba Rao (Died) by Lr
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD689; 2007(2)ALT638
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. 1st respondent obtained a decree for specific performance against the revision petitioner and filed EP for executing the said decree. In that EP, revision petitioner filed a petition under Order 21 Rule 2 CPC for recording satisfaction or adjustment of the said decree alleging that the decree put to execution was adjusted out of Court by the decree holder by receiving money from him. During the pendency of that petition, 1st respondent died and so his son was brought on record as 2nd respondent. He filed his counter denying adjustment between the deceased-lst respondent and the revision petitioner.2. In support of his case, the revision petitioner besides examining himself as PW1 examined three other witnesses as P.Ws. 2 to 4 and marked Exs. A1 to A5. On his behalf 2nd respondent besides examining himself as R.W. 1 examined two other witnesses as R.Ws. 2 and 3 and marked Exs. B1 to B9. Exs. X1 to X3 were marked through R.W. 3.3. The Executing Court disbelieve...
Apseb and ors. Vs. Neenavath Bhuli @ Lakshmi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-19-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD476; 2007(4)ALT664
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. When Mr. Neenavath Sakru, who is an agriculturist of a village in Medak District, was proceeding on 11-6-1997, on his bicycle to a nearby town, by name Ramayampet, a service wire, taken out from a pole to a bore-well of the 8th respondent herein, was hanging in a lower level, across a cart track, on which Sakru was travelling. On coming into contact with it, he died of electrocution. His legal representatives filed O.S. No. 28 of 1999 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Medak, claiming a sum of Rs. 4,80,000/-, towards damages, on account of his death. They filed the suit as indigent persons. It was pleaded that the death occurred on account of electrocution, which is solely attributable to the negligence on the part of the appellants herein, who were impleaded as defendants 1 to 4 in the suit. Through its judgment, dated 16-4-2002, the trial Court decreed the suit for a sum of Rs. 2,42,200/-. The appellants filed A.S. No. 67 of 2004 in the Court of III District...
Santoshlal Gupta Vs. Bhanu Hotels and Proprietor Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-18-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD733
T. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The writ petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to quash the judgment, dated 16-10-2001, passed by the learned Special Court under the Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act (for brevity, 'the Act') in L.G.C. No. 160 of 1997.2. The writ petitioner is the applicant, who filed the application under Section 8 of the Act, against the respondent for redelivery of the schedule mentioned land to the applicant and for compensation amounting to Rs. 80,00,000/- after declaring the respondent as a land grabber. It was the case of the applicant that the applicant met with an accident on 31-5-1982 and received severe injuries on his head, due to which he lost his senses and that he was admitted in Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad and treated by eminent Neurologist, but the condition was not improved. That in the year 1995 when the son of the applicant by name, Sunil Goel, filed the suit, O.S. No. 473 of 1995, along with other co-parceners on the file of the I Additional Judge, City Civi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »