Andhra Pradesh Court December 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.
Vikrampuri Co-operative House Building Society Ltd. Vs. Secunderabad C ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD494; 2007(3)ALT192
ORDERG.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for issue of a direction to Secunderabad Cantonment Board (for short, the Board') to demolish the alleged illegal construction made by respondent Nos. 6 to 9 on Plot No. C~2, Vikrampuri Colony, Secunderabad. It has been further prayed that respondent Nos. 6 to 9 be restrained from alionating the alloyed illegal structures and the Board be directed to seal Plot No. C-2 and stop all further activities on the said plot.2. In the affidavit filed by him, Shri W.V. Ramana, Secretaty of the petitioner society has averred that despite the objections raised by the society against the construction of commercial structure on Plot No. C-2, which is a residential plot, respondent Nos. 6 to 9 have erected a huge commercial complex and that too in complete violation of the sanctioned plan. In paragraphs 4 and 5 of his affidavit, Shri W.V. Ramana has given the details of the so-called violation of the sanctioned plan. In paragraph 6...
Dr. Ambedkar Seva Samajam, Rep. by Its General Secretary, M. Jaya Rao ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD520; 2007(1)ALT345
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Episode in short: M/s. Dr. Ambedkar Seva Sangham, Ambedkar Bhavan, Akberpet, Bapatla, Guntur District, represented by its General Secretary M. Jaya Rao and certain others filed the present Writ Petition praying for issuance of a writ of quo warranto against the 9th respondent on the ground that the 9th respondent had usurped the office of the Chairperson of Bapatla Municipality and also the office of Municipal Councillor of 8th Ward of the said Municipality on the ground that the said 9th respondent belongs to Scheduled Caste though in fact he does not belong to Schedule Caste at all, but belongs to B.C. 'C (Mala) converted to Christianity.2. Several factual details are narrated in the respective pleadings of the parties. This Court issued Notice Before Admission initially on 28-8-2006 and issued rule nisi on 7-9-2006. Inasmuch as the contesting respondents had put in their respective pleadings, the counter affidavits, the Writ Petition is being finally dispose...
Basanthilal Aggarwal and anr. Vs. P.S. Bhamdari and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD805; 2007(2)ALT566
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. Indeed a common order was dictated in open Court after having heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioners and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents was absent. The order proceeded only on jurisdictional issue. But it was not transcribed and signed. Some time after the order was dictated in open Court, the learned Counsel on record representing the respondents appeared. At his request, the matters were directed to be called under the caption 'For being mentioned' on the next date. When the matter thus appeared under that caption, both the learned Counsel were heard again afresh. After having heard them at some length on the jurisdictional issue, it was felt expedient to hear the arguments on merits and we decided to recall the earlier order. The matters were accordingly adjourned. Both the learned Counsel submitted written arguments. The learned Counsel for the first respondent by name Sri Rakesh Sanghi, who submitted writt...
M. Satyanarayana and anr. Vs. Viswanath Kakar (Died) Per Lrs. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD318
T.CH. Surya Rao, J. 1. Inasmuch as both the writ petitions emanate from the judgment dated 19.2.1998 passed by the learned Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad, in L.G.C. No. 86 of 1986, they can be disposed of together.2. The writ petitioners herein who are the respondents in L.G.C. No. 86 of 1996 seek a writ of certiorari to quash the said judgment.3. The first respondent in both these writ petitions filed L.G.C. No. 86 of 1996 before the Special Court alleging inter alia that the respondents therein, the present writ petitioners, grabbed the application schedule property admeasuring 1506 square yards of land covered by Survey No. 17 (old Survey No. 14) of Old Malakpet, Hyderabad, and sought for delivery of the said property to him after evicting the respondents' therefrom. That application eventually after conducting full-fledged enquiry was allowed by the learned Special Court declaring the respondents as land-grabbers and directing them to vacate...
Mangali Venkatesh Vs. Shaik Mastan and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD840
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Appellant who is the son of M. Laxmamma (the deceased) who died while travelling in a car due to an accident said to have been caused by a lorry belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) seeking compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- from the respondents on the ground the deceased aged about 45 years was earning Rs. 6,323/- per month. First respondent chose to remain ex parte. Second respondent filed its counter putting the appellant to proof of the averments in the petition. The claim petition filed by the appellant and some other claim petitions filed by some other legal representatives of the victims of the same accident were clubbed and common evidence was recorded.2. In support of the case of the claimants in all the claim petitions, two witnesses were examined as P.Ws. 1 and 2 and Exs. A.1 to A. 10 were marked. No oral evidence was adduced by the secon...
Vulavakayala Laxmi and ors. Vs. Dhulipudi Veeraswamy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD132; 2007(2)ALT550
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This Second Appeal is filed by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 92 of 1992, on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Pithapuram, against the judgment and decree dated 24-8-2005 in A.S. No. 75 of 2000, passed by the Court of Principal District Judge, West Godavari, at Rajahmundry. The said appeal was filed by the 4th defendant against the decree and judgment dated 26-4-1996 passed by the trial court.2. During the pendency of the suit, the 1st plaintiff, Vulavakayala Subba Rao, died, and his legal representatives were brought on record. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to, as arrayed in the suit.3. The plaintiffs filed the suit against the defendants, for the relief of declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit schedule property. In the alternative, they prayed for the relief of partition of the suit schedule property and allotment of corresponding shares, to them. The 1st defendant is the son, 2nd defendant is the wife and 3rd defend...
Vasavi Co-operative Urban Bank Limited Vs. Authority Appointed Under S ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD795; [2007(113)FLR748]
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. The petitioner is the Vasavi Co-operative Urban Bank Limited represented by its Managing Director. This writ petition is filed seeking to call for the records in S.E. No. 5 of 2004 to S.E. No. 39 of 2004, S.E. No. 41 of 2004 to S.E. No. 43 of 2004 and S.E. Nos. 14, 15 and 16 of 2005 and quash the orders passed by the 1st respondent/The Authority Appointed under Section 48(1) of A.P. Shops and Establishments Act, 1988 and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-IV, Hyderabad (for short the 1st respondent authority) dated 30-6-2006 setting aside the termination orders dated 31-8-2004 and directing reinstatement of the petitioners into service with half of the back-wages.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are:The petitioner is a Co-operative Urban Bank, registered under the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short 'the A.P.C.S. Act') and is governed by the provisions of the said Act. The petitioner bank has been granted licence vide lette...
M. Saraswathi Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALT596
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against order dated 1-12-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby he dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant for quashing memo dated 9-11-2006 issued by Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition (Industries), Hyderabd (respondent No. 3).2. The appellant claims to be a member of the joint family which owned land in Survey Nos. 220 and 221 of Kapra Village, Keesara Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, which was acquired by the State Government in 1966 for establishing Nuclear Fuel Complex. The possession of the land was taken over on 4-1-1967 and compensation was paid to the land owners. After 35 years, one of the share holders, namely, M. Rami Reddy succeeded in manipulating the State apparatus which resulted in issue of G.O.Ms. No. 375 dated 7-9-2002 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, whereby some land was released from acquisition. That decision of the Government generated lot of litigation. Shri Bhaskar Redd...
Branch Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Are Ramulu @ S. Ramul ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD531
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. The first respondent filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act, for brevity), seeking compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- for the injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicle accident, said to have been occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry belonging to the second respondent and insured with the appellant.2. After contest by the second respondent and the appellant, the Tribunal having held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry belonging to the second respondent, awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- as compensation to the first respondent. Questioning the compensation awarded to the first respondent, the insured preferred this appeal and dissatisfied with the compensation awarded to him, the first respondent preferred cross-objections.3. At the time of hearing of the appeal, the learned Counsel conceded that in view of the ratio in National Insurance C...
Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Baddipalli Chinath ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-20-2006
Reported in: II(2007)ACC535; 2007(4)ALD46; 2007(3)ALT20
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Respondents 1 to 3, who are the widow and children of Nookaraju (the deceased) who allegedly died due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, (the Act), seeking compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- from the appellant.2. After contest by the appellant, the Tribunal, by the award under appeal, awarded Rs. 2,14,000 as compensation to the respondents 1 to 3. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant preferred this appeal.3. The points for consideration in this appeal are:(1) Whether the deceased died due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant?(2) To what compensation, if any, are the respondents entitled to?4. The contention of the learned Counsel for appellant is that in view of the evidence of R.W.1, the Tribunal was in error in holding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driv...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »