Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
K. Kannaiah and ors. Vs. S. Desamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD718; 2006(6)ALT432
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two revisions are filed by the same petitioners, but in relation to different sets of proceedings.2. Petitioners are residents of a hamlet of a village, by name Nasanoor of Puttur Mandal, Chittoor District. On finding that their hamlet is not connected to the main village, they made efforts to get a road laid, at a programme conducted by the Government, in or about June or July 2002.3. Apprehending that the petitioners and other villagers would lay road over their lands, without acquiring the same or without payment of compensation, the respondents herein filed O.S.Nos. 135 and 136 of 2002, in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur, for the relief of perpetual injunction, against the petitioners. They also filed applications, being I.A.Nos. 510 and 529 of 2002, under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C., in the respective suits. The trial Court is said to have appointed an Advocate-Commissioner, to note the physical features of the suit schedule ...
Bhogi Someswara Rao Vs. Koki Deepa and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD669
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The respondents 1 to 4 filed O.S. No. 5 of 2003 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Srikakulam, against the petitioner and his father, the 5th respondent, claiming damages against them. The 1st respondent is said to have been proposed for marriage with the petitioner herein. But the marriage did not materialise. Petitioner and his father, the 5th respondent, filed O.S. No. 8 of 2001 in the Court of Additional District Judge, Srikakulam, claiming damages against respondents 1 to 4, on account of breakdown of the marriage. The petitioner is also said to have filed a complaint in C.C.No. 238 of 2001 against the respondents 1 to 4, and it is said to have resulted in acquittal. O.S. No. 5 of 2003 is filed by respondents 1 to 4 herein, claiming damages, on account of malicious prosecution.2. On behalf of the petitioner herein, his mother filed an application under Order 32 Rule 3 CPC with a prayer to permit her to act as guardian. She pleaded that the petitioner...
Dongari Venkatram Vs. M. Tirpathanna S.i. of Police and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2697
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri J. Kanakaiah, the learned Counsel representing the petitioner and Sri B. Aga Reddy representing the respondents 1 to 6 and Public Prosecutor.2. Sri J. Kanakaiah, the learned Counsel representing the petitioner would submit that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class Huzurnagar, Nalgonda District had not appreciated the facts and circumstances properly and declined to frame additional charges for the offences punishable under Sections 195 and 211, I.P.C. The learned Counsel also would explain the facts and circumstances in detail.3. The petitioner is the complainant in C.C. No- 244 of 1999 and respondents 1 to 6 are the accused in the said case. It is stated that there is enmity between the petitioner and the respondents 4 to 6 in respect of their family properties. The petitioner and respondents 4 to 6 are relatives. The respondents 1 to 3 are the police officials and they are public servants. It is ...
Peddi Kumara Swamy @ Muthyala Kumara Swamy and ors. Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD(Cri)767; I(2007)DMC373
B. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 31.1.2004 on the file of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, whereby the learned III Additional Sessions Judge found A-1 Peddi Kumaraswamy @ Muthyala Kumaraswamy, A-2 Peddi Sadaiah, A-3 Peddi Kanakaiah and A-4 Peddi lylamma guilty for the offences under Section 498A, IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and further found A-1 Peddi Kumaraswamy @ Muthyala Kumaraswamy guilty for the offence under Sections 302 and 201, IPC and convicted them accordingly and sentenced A-1 to A-4 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and pay a fine of Rs. 500 in default to suffer S.I. for one month each for the offence under Section 498A IPC, rigorous imprisonment for two years and pay fine of Rs. 500 each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Further sentenced A-1 to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 500 i...
Dantuluri Ranga Devi Vs. Registrar of Companies and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-2006
Reported in: [2007]135CompCas599(AP); [2007]78SCL242(AP)
V. Eswaraiah, J.1. The petitioner is accused No. 4 in C. C. No. 280 of 2002, on the file of the Special Judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad. On a complaint filed by the Registrar of Companies, Andhra Pradesh, for the offence under Section 162 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') for non-filing of returns as required under Sections 159 and 161 of the Act, the said C. C. No. 280 of 2002, has been taken on file for prosecution of all the accused.2. The case of the complainant is that accused No. 1, is a public limited company and A2 to All, are directors/officers in charge of the company with all the relevant files to which the complaint relates. By virtue of the provisions of Section 166 read with Section 210 of the Act, accused Nos. 1 to 11 were required to hold its first annual general meeting in respect of the first financial year by July 19, 1998, at the latest and by virtue of provisions of Sections 159 and 161 of the Act the annual returns in the prescribed form made...
Bonthagorla Naga Lakshmi Vs. Yarasani Lingaiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-2006
Reported in: III(2007)BC437
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel. 2. It is no doubt true, in the facts and circumstances instead of filing criminal revision case, it would have been appropriate to file criminal petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. However, inasmuch as the High Court of Judicature is exercising powers both under Section 482, Cr.P.C, and under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C, this Court is inclined to decide the matter on merits.3. The only ground raised by Mr. Md. Saleem, learned Counsel representing the petitioner is that the petitioner is the wife of Al, she never signed the cheque nor at any point of time she had given consent. Despite the same, C.C. No 315 of 2004 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Excise, Guntur is being proceeded with not only against the husband, but also as against the wife. This is illegal and the complaint is liable to be quashed as against the wife.4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, however would maintain that the C...
N. Laxmipati Sastry Vs. Registrar, Osmania University and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD213; 2006(3)ALT411
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner invokes the jurisdiction of this Court seeking a direction to respondent Osmania University to permit the petitioner to sit for third year LL.B., Degree examination by declaring that he is completing various courses - Date of entitled to sit for the examination.2. The fact of the matter is not much in dispute. Briefly stated, it is as follows. For over a decade, the admission to first year B.L./LL.B., course in Andhra Pradesh is through an entrance test known as Law Common Entrance Test (LAWCET, for brevity). In 1991, large number of private law colleges filed writ petitions before this Court seeking a declaration that private law colleges are entitled to admit students, who have not passed LAWCET 1991. Pending such writ petitions, it appears that Y.P.R. Law College, Malkajgiri (not a party to this writ petition) issued a notification inviting applications from graduates for admission to LL.B., first year course without LAWCET 1991 for the academic ...
Dunna Venkata Rao Vs. Mootha Ramakoti
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD523
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. CRP No. 6850 of 2003 is filed by the petitioner-tenant in R.C.C. No. 64 of 1983 on the file of the Rent Controller-cum-Principal District Munsif, Kakinada as against the order made in R.C.A. No. 9 of 1995 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority-cum-Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada reversing the order made in the aforesaid R.C.C. The respondent-landlord in R.C.C. No. 64 of 1983 is the respondent in the present C.R.P. The said R.C.C. was filed under Section 8(3) of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter in short referred to as the 'Act' for the purpose of convenience) praying permission of the Court to deposit rents. The learned Rent Controller allowed the said R.C.C. and the same was reversed by the appellate authority. R.C.C. No. 33 of 1984 on the file of the Rent Controller-cum-Principal District Munsiff, Kakinada filed by the respondent-landlord herein for eviction on certain grounds was dismissed by the lea...
Kocherla Veeraswamy Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2769
T. Meena Kumari, J. 1. The present appeal is preferred by the appellant accused aggrieved by the conviction and the sentence imposed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam Division. In Sessions case No. 169 of 2002 on 24-5-2004 for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201, IPC.2. The facts in brief are as follows:One Kocherla Grace Sunitha (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) was the wife of the accused and their marriage was performed about 14 years ago and they have been residing at Nirmal Nagar, Ongole in a rented house along with their children. The accused having addicted to all vices like drinking and debauchery started harassing the deceased for the last few years. 3. While so, on the intervening night of 31-12-2000/1-1-2001 when the deceased along with her children went to the Church to offer prayers on the eve of new year's day, the accused having decided to kill the deceased went to the Church, where the deceased and his children were prese...
T. Kumar Babu Vs. Gireesh Sanghi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD(Cri)967; 2006CriLJ2839
ORDERGopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. The petitioner is a practicing Advocate, who filed a private complaint be-fore the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, complaining the offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') against the respondents 1 to 3 herein. However, the Court below, by its order dated 6-6-2005, refused to take cognizance of the said complaint and accordingly rejected the same. Hence, this revision by the complainant.2. Originally, this matter was taken up for hearing on 18-7-2005 and subsequently, it was adjourned on number of occasions. On notice, the respondents have put in their appearance.3. The petitioner strenuously contended before this Court that the respondents 1 to 3 herein are billionaries and duping people by resorting to various methods and one such method is by collecting funds for Gujarat victims and the said amounts were misappropriated, attracting the definition of Section 406, IPC and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »