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.
S. Vasantha and anr. Vs. District Collector and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALT714
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court issued rule nisi on 29-9-2006.2. The counter affidavit, additional counter affidavit, additional documents and the reply affidavit also had been filed.3. At the request of the Counsel on record, the Writ Petition is being disposed of finally.4. The Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the Proced.No. B/348/06 dated 27-9-2006 of the 2nd respondent as illegal and void and consequently hold that the petitioners are entitled to deal with the property in House Nos. 10-3-113/P, 10-3-32/9/114P, and 10-32-9/11/115P, by developing the same in accordance with the sanction plan of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad under permit No. 51/97 in file No. 0837/CSC/TPT/2003, dt.21-8-2004 and pass such other suitable orders.5. Sri A.Ramalingeshwar Rao, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioners had taken this Court through the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, the counter affidavit, the additional counter ...
Vigneswarapu Jaggaraju and ors. Vs. Gitta, Seetha, Ratnam and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD843; 2007(4)ALT404
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Second Appeal is preferred by the plaintiff in O.S. No. 268 of 1976 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Narsapur. The respondents are the defendants in the suit.2. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property, damages etc. The plaint schedule property is 0-04 cents vacant land which is useful for construction of houses. The property originally belonged to defendant No. 3. Defendant No. 3 executed a registered gift deed on 26-02-1962 in favour of the plaintiff, who is no other than the son of defendant No. 3 and it was mentioned in the gift deed that the property was delivered on the same day. Defendant No. 1 lent some money to defendant No. 3 and when she failed to repay the same, defendant Nos. 1 and 2 filed a suit in Small Causes Court for recovery of the land and the suit was decreed. Subsequently, an Execution Petition was filed to bring the suit schedule property for sale and ac...
Tirumala Educational Trust Represented by Its President and Correspond ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD188
V. Eswaraiah, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 04.12.1996 passed in O.S. No. 15 of 1987 by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tirupati.2. The appellant is the plaintiff trust and the respondent is the defendant in the suit O.S. No. 15 of 1987 filed seeking declaration that the plaintiff trust is entitled at its option to get successive renewals of the lease in respect of the plaint schedule property successively for period of six years each from the defendant Devasthanam and for consequential permanent injunction. The said suit has been dismissed by judgment and decree dated 04.12.1996 and aggrieved by the same the plaintiff trust preferred this appeal.PLEADINGS:2. The plaint averments in brief are as follows:(a) The plaintiff is an educational trust registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 to cater to the educational needs of the children of the permanent population of Tirumala Hills and the trust commenced kindergarten section of the schoo...
L.P. Christiat, D/O K. Abraham Vs. Sri Ch. Suryanarayana, S/O Tammi Na ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ2010
ORDERT. Meena Kumari, J.1. The petitioner-accused filed the present petition under Section 482 of Cr. P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 1268 of 2001 on the file of the XV Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad. The brief facts of the case are that the 1st respondent filed a private complaint against the petitioner-accused herein under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), alleging that the petitioner-accused borrowed a sum of Rs. 10,500/- towards hand loan from the 1st respondent-complainant in the month of March,1998 and in discharge of the said debt, she has executed demand promissory note on 6.3.1998 and promised to repay the same along with interest at 2% per month. The petitioner is also said to have issued a cheque bearing No. 069598, dated 11.06.2001 for a sum of Rs. 10,500/- drawn on ICICI Bank, Khairatabad Branch, Hyderabad. When the complainant presented the said cheque for payment, the same was returned on...
inturi Venkaiah Vs. Bathineedi Ramachandraiah (Died) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD271; 2007(2)ALT641
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. These civil revision petitions (CRPs) can be disposed of by a common order as the core question that falls for consideration is same. These CRPs are filed under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 (the Provincial Court, for brevity). CRP Nos. 3766 of 2004 and 4572 of 2006 are filed by the plaintiffs and CRP Nos. 4325 and 6065 of 2004 are filed by the defendants, who suffered decrees passed by the Courts concerned exercising small cause jurisdiction. The parties are referred to by their status in the lower Courts.2. Treating CRP No. 4325 of 2004 as an illustrative one, the brief fact of the matter may be noticed. The plaintiff filed suit, being S.C. No. 91 of 1994, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 5,508/- towards arrears of maktha (rent for agricultural land) for the years 1992-1993 and 1993-1994 and also tax for second crop. He alleged that he let out land admeasuring Ac. 0.96 cents in Survey No. 253/1 situated at Vendra Village of Pedapudi Manda...
Dr. G. Jagadeshwar Reddy Vs. Dr. K. Dharma Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD422; 2007(2)ALT559
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. In this revision under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (the Rent Act, for brevity), the landlord is the petitioner. He is Medical Doctor by profession. He is the owner of non-residential premises bearing Door No. 3-5-21/1 to 5 situated at Ramkote, Hyderabad - a prime commercial area (hereafter called, the schedule premises). A portion of the same in the first floor was let out to the respondent (tenant), who is Dental Surgeon specializing in Orthodontia (correction of teeth). The landlord filed R.C. No. 146 of 1998 before the Rent Controller, Hyderabad, seeking eviction of the tenant for personal occupation. He gave two reasons for the same : that the landlord's father is suffering from old age problems and requires medical attendance regularly, and that he wants to shift practice from his native place to Hyderabad, as he has had been receiving threatening calls from extremists for over three years. The tenant opposed ...
Andekar Laxmi Bai and ors. Vs. Syed Rahmathulla Quadri and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD534
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Appellants, who are the widow and children of Andekar Manoji (deceased) filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the respondents alleging that the deceased died due to an accident caused by the driver of the lorry belonged to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent due to his rash and negligent driving.2. First respondent chose to remain ex parte both before the Tribunal and this Court. Second respondent contested the claim inter alia on the ground that inasmuch as the cheque issued by the first respondent towards the premium for the policy bounced, it cancelled the policy issued in favour of the first respondent and so it is not liable to pay the compensation payable to the claimants.3. After considering the evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 96,880/- as compensation to the appellants and passed an award only against the first respondent, bu...
Batturoo Ravi Vs. Shankar Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD449
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Appellant who suffered injuries in an accident caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the respondents. The Tribunal, after trial, held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor belonging to the first respondent, awarded Rs. 25,000/- as compensation for the injuries suffered by the appellant. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded to him, the injured preferred this appeal.2. Since the appeal is by the injured seeking higher compensation than that is awarded to him, the point for consideration in this appeal is 'To what compensation is the appellant entitled to?'3. Unfortunately, the Tribunal without specifying under what head it is awarding what compensation to the appellant, it just ...
P. Krishna Vamsi and anr. Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corp ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2008ACJ416; 2007(3)ALD471; 2007(3)ALT383
G. Chandraiah, J.1. Aggrieved by the common judgment and decree dated 04-01 -2000 passed in M.V.O.P. Nos. 336 and 337 of 1998 by the learned IV Additional District Judge-Cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'), Kurnool, claimants preferred instant separate appeals. As they arise out of the same common judgment, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. M.V.O.P. No. 336 of 1998 was filed by the petitioner/claimant, who sustained injuries in the accident, which was occurred on 18-06-1997. Parents of the deceased, who died in the same accident, filed M.V.O.P. No. 337 of 1998.3. The averments in the claim petition in brief are that the deceased by name V. Siva Prasad and the petitioner in O.P.No. 336 of 1997 at about 11 a.m., along with some other friends, were going on scooters to Mahanandi from Nandyal. The deceased and the said petitioner were proceeding on a scooter bearing No. AP-27A-773, which was driven by the deceased. At about 11 -30 a.m. when th...
Apsrtc and anr. Vs. Govindram Gupta and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(4)ALD48
V. Eswaraiah, J.1. The appellant is the APSRTC and the respondents are the claimants.2. The claimants filed O.P. No. 1709 of 1997 on the file of the III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, claiming compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- for the death of the wife of the first respondent and the mother of respondents 2 and 3.3. The appellant disputing the finding recorded by the Tribunal below contending that there was no rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the APSRTC bus bearing No. AP 13 B 5719 and the OP ought to have dismissed for non-joinder of proper 'and necessary parties i.e. owner and insurer of the Tata Sumo.4. It is the case of the claimant that on 11-5-1997 while the deceased along with the family members of the first claimant after having darshan at Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, left Tirupathi at 5.30 p.m. in Tata Sumo car bearing No. 13 B 5719 to Hyderabad, and when they reached near Manopad Village limits on the National Highway No. 7 at K.M....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »