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.
Shaik Mastan and ors. Vs. Karempudi Dharma Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD643; 2007(4)ALT409
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Defendants in a suit for specific performance are the appellants. For the sake of convenience parties to the appeal would hereinafter be referred to as they are arrayed in the trial Court.2. The case, in brief, of the plaintiff is that Khasimbi (hereinafter referred to as the deceased), i.e., wife of first defendant and mother of Defendants 2 to 6, was the owner of Ac. 1.25 cents of wet land situated in R.S. Nos. 114/2 and 115/2 of Gollapudi Village (hereinafter referred to as the suit land). She agreed to sell the suit land to him for Rs. 30,000/-, at the rate of Rs. 21,000/- per acre and received Rs. 1,000/-as advance and executed an agreement of sale in his favour on 4-6-1976 and put him in possession thereof. The said agreement was attested by the first defendant. As per the terms of the said agreement, he has to discharge the debts due from the deceased to third parties mentioned therein. So, he discharged those debts and is always ready and willing to perfor...
Narinder Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Rep. by Its Secretary to Gover ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD769; 2006(3)ALT286
Ramesh Ranganathan, J.1. In this writ petition, the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, in O.A.72 of 2005 dated 15-2-2005, and the proceedings of the Railway Board dated 24-9-2002, as confirmed by the 1st respondent in his proceedings dated 17-3-2004, are sought to be quashed.2. Facts, in brief, are that the petitioner, a post graduate in Engineering (Structures) from Punjab University, consequent upon his selection by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) at the Combined Engineering Services Examination, came to be appointed to the Indian Railway Service of Engineers in 1988 and was promoted to the Junior Administrative Cadre in the month of January, 1999. He was confirmed in the said cadre during April 2004 along with the 1992 batch of IRSE officers. He was superseded by his 1988 batchmates and his juniors from the 1989, 1990 and 1991 batches, in view of the impugned order of punishment. While working as a Divisional Engineer, (gauge conversion), Hubli, Karnataka State...
Vadlamudi Durga Prasad Vs. Paruchuri Venkateswara Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALD251; 2006(3)ALT495
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to call for records relating to the order dated 22-2-2006 in O.P.No. 41 of 2005 on the file of the A.P. Co-operative Tribunal, Warangal and to quash the same being arbitrary and illegal.2. The facts, in brief, are as under:Election to the Managing Committee of the 6th respondent-Bank was held on 21-10-2005. It is not in dispute that the petitioner as well as respondents 1 to 4 herein were elected as members of the managing committee, which consists of 13 members in all. Thereafter, the 5th respondent-Election Officer issued notice in Form XIII calling upon the elected members to elect office bearers. In pursuance thereof, petitioner as well as respondents 1 to 4 filed their nominations for the post of the President. However, the 5th respondent-Election Officer rejected the nominations of respondents 1 to 4 on the ground that a member can either propose or second one candidate only; whereas, the nominations of...
K. Meghamala Vs. Devulapalli Indira and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALT785
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Smt. Anasuya, wife of K. Narasing Rao, 10th respondent in E.P.No. 7 of 2005 in RC.No. 170 of 1994, had preferred CRP. No. 6990 of 2005 as against the order made by the Principal Rent Controller at Secunderabad in the aforesaid E.P., dated 16-12-2005. Likewise 12th respondent-Venkateswar Rao, one of the sons of the said Narsing Rao, filed CRP.No. 6978 of 2005 questioning the selfsame order. Smt. Meghamala, daughter of Narsing Rao filed yet other CRP., viz, CRP.6930 of 2005 questioning the self-same order. All these three CRPs are being disposed of by a common order since these CRPs are preferred by certain legal representatives of the deceased-Narsing Rao as against the self-same order and also in view of the fact that the objections raised and the contentions advanced on behalf of these revision petitioners in these CRPs being common.2. Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana and Sri Mohd. Osman Shaheed and Sri Chandrasekhar Reddy representing the revision petitioners in thi...
K. Megamala @ M. Meghamala Vs. Devulapalli Indira and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD810
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Smt. Anasuya, wife of K. Narasing Rao, 10th respondent in E.P. No. 7 of 2005 in RC No. 170 of 1994, had preferred CRP.No. 6990 of 2005 as against the order made by the Principal Rent Controller at Secunderabad in the aforesaid E.P., dated 16-12-2005. Likewise 12th respondent- Venkateswar Rao, one of the sons of the said Narsing Rao, filed CRP.No. 6978 of 2005 questioning the selfsame order. Smt. Meghamala, daughter of Narsing Rao filed yet other CRP., viz., CRP. 6930 of 2005 questioning the self-same order. All these three CRPs are being disposed of by a common order since these CRPs are preferred by certain legal representatives of the deceased-Narsing Rao as against the self-same order and also in view of the fact that the objections raised and the contentions advanced on behalf of these revision petitioners in these CRPs being common.2. Sri Vedula Venkataramana and Sri Mohd. Osman Shaheed and Sri Chandrasekhar Reddy representing the revision petitioners in t...
Somagani Venkata Subbamma Vs. District Panchayat Officer and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD1
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is a Sarpanch of Dokiparru Gram Panchayat in Gudlavalleru Mandal of Krishna District. She was elected in 2001. On an allegation that she contributed a sum of Rs. 50,000/-from out of Gram Panchayat funds to Mandal Panchayat funds, without proper approval from the higher authorities, action was initiated under Rule 42 of the Rules relating to taxes and lodging of monies and payment of monies by the Gram Panchayat, promulgated in G.O. Ms. No. 30, dated 20-1-1995 (hereinafter called, the Rules). A show-cause notice was issued on 19-7-2005. The petitioner submitted explanation on 30-8-2005. After considering the same, the first respondent issued the impugned order bearing proceedings No. 3065/04 Pt.5, dated 12-9-2005, permanently prohibiting the petitioner from drawing monies of the Gram Panchayat. This order is assailed in the writ petition. A counter-affidavit is filed by the second respondent justifying the impugned order. It is stated that the Mandal...
T. Syed Basha Vs. A.P.S.R.T.C.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD292
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two revisions arise under identical facts. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order.2. The petitioners filed O.P. Nos. 406 and 407 of 2003 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal claiming compensation against A.P.S.R.T.C. They alleged that they sustained injuries in an accident involving the bus bearing No. AP10-Z-8109 on 15-9-2002. According to them, they were initially treated in Government General Hospital, Kadapa and thereafter, were shifted to Madanapalli Hospitals Private Limited, Madanapalli. The treatment is said to have taken place in that hospital from 16th to 26th September, 2002.3. The recording of evidence in the O.Ps. has commenced. At that stage, they filed I.A. Nos. 269 and 270 of 2005 respectively under Order 26 Rule 9 C.P.C. to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to record the evidence of one Dr. A. Maheswara Rao of M/s. Madanapalli Hospitals Private Limited. The Tribun...
J. Ramulamma and ors. Vs. J. Danan Reddy and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD481
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Respondents herein filed O.S. No. 83 of 2004, in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Bhongir, for the relief of declaration to the effect that they have right of pre-emption, vis-a-vis the petitioners herein, in the matter of transfer of the suit schedule properties for fixation of the market value, thereof, and to declare the sale deed dated 15-7-2004, as null and void and not binding on them.2. The respondents pleaded that themselves and the petitioners have common origin and that Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act (for short 'the Act') applies for any alienation, proposed to be undertaken by them.3. The petitioners filed written statement, denying the allegations of the respondents. They pleaded that themselves and the respondents are not class-I heirs of the same ancestor. It was asserted that the suit schedule property has since been sold. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed the issues, including the one, as to whethe...
State of A.P., Rep. by Executive Engineer, R and B Vs. Syndicate Const ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD177; 2006(3)ALT231
D. Appa Rao, J.1. The appellant, the State of Andhra Pradesh preferred this appeal against the order of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada dated 2-12-1994 in allowing LA. No. 3224/1993 filed by the respondent herein to reject the plaint under Order? Rule 11(d) of C.P.C. 2. The appellant, the State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by the Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings, National Highway Division, Vijayawada, filed a suit O.S. No. 100/1980 against the respondent-Syndicate Constructions for recovery of an amount of Rs. 10,58,914/- towards compliance of work left out by it in regard to contract for widening and strengthening the double lane carriage way from Vijayawada towards Eluru on Madras-Calcutta Road. 13 years after filing of the suit, the defendant filed a petition LA. No. 3224/1993 under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC to reject the plaint on the ground that the Executive Engineer cannot represent the State of Andhra Pradesh and there was neither special order or genera...
Keram Mangaiah and anr. Vs. Agent to Government at Khammam and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD74; 2006(3)ALT548
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. By means of filing these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners challenged the rejection endorsement dt. 15-6-1995 of the second respondent, Sub-Registrar, Kothagudem refusing to register sale documents presented for registration in the light of Form-L dated 10-6-1995 received from the first respondent, Agent to the Government, Khammam.2. Since issue that falls for adjudication in both the writ petitions is one and the same, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common order.3. The petitioners in WP No. 14369/1995 and 14370/1995 intend to purchase Ac. 1-00 in S.No. 118/2 and Ac.2-16 guntas in S.No. 118/2 situate at Chunchupalli Gram Panchayat in Kothagudem Mandal, Khammam District respectively. The area is a notified scheduled area. The documents were presented for registration in the office of Sub-Registrar, Kothagudem under Ref. No. P8/87 and P4/89 along with declaration in Form-K requesting to grant Fo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »