Andhra Pradesh Court April 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.
Cavim Realty (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. Station House Officer and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-2006
Reported in: 2008(6)ALT401
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. The petitioners, who are accused in Crime No. 74 of 2004 on the file of 1 Town Police Station, Adoni, have invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of his Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ of Mandamus or any appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the 1st respondent in having registered the said crime, as illegal, arbitrary and one without jurisdiction and to quash the same and pass such further or other orders as the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.2. The petitioners state that respondent No. 2, namely M/s. Sree Rayalaseema Paper Mills Limited, a company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, is having its Head Office at Adoni. It acquired several properties at different places in the country, and one such property is situated in Mumbai, where it established its Regional Office. On respondent No. 2 becoming sick, it closed down it...
N.R. Patel and Co., Rep. by Its Partner and ors. Vs. Smt. T. Aparna an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC488; 2006ACJ2719; 2006(4)ALD130; 2006(3)ALT657
D. Appa Rao, J.1. This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company against the award passed by the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District, in M.V.O.P. No. 310 of 1992, dated 9-2-1994 awarding a compensation of Rs. 17,10,000/-. The claimants, widow and children of T. Ravi, the deceased, filed cross-objections against the order disallowing the balance of compensation of Rs. 7,90,000/-2. Briefly, the facts are that T. Ravi, was an industrialist. He was aged 30 years, earning about Rs. 10,000/- per month. While so, on 11-4-1990, when he was going in a jeep AAJ 4004 along with others and by the time they reached Mandinaguda, the driver of the car TSR 2745 belonging to M/s. M.R. Patel & Company, drove it in a rash and negligent manner, in a high speed, rashly and negligently, and dashed against the jeep, when it was coming in opposite direction, due to which the jeep went off the road, turned turtle and fell down due to which the petitione...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Col. L.S.N. Murthy and anr. Overruled
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD368; 2006(4)ALT256; 2006(3)ARBLR552(AP)
G. Rohini, J.1. This appeal is preferred under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'the Act') against the order dated 5-11-2004 in O.P. No. 1457 of 2001 on the file of the Court of m Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereunder the application made by the appellant herein under Section 34 of the Act to set aside the arbitral award dated 6-6-2001 was dismissed.2. The facts, in brief, may be noted as under:The second respondent herein was awarded the contract for supply of fresh fruits at supply depots at Tirumalgherry, Hakimpet and ASC Golconda for the period from 1-10-1999 to 30-9-2000 in pursuance of the tenders invited by the appellant. As per the agreement dated 6-8-1999 executed between the parties, the second respondent was required to make the supply of fresh fruits in terms of the specifications and conditions annexed to the agreement. It is not in dispute that in pursuance of the said agreement though the supply of fruits was ...
M.A. Aziz Vs. Dr. Mohd. Abdul Quddus
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD275; 2006(4)ALT712
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is a tenant in respect of premises bearing No. 16-2-600. Initially, it was owned by one Mohd. Abdul Raheem. Stating that the said property was gifted to him by the original owner, through a gift deed dated 29-8-1988, the respondent filed R.C. No. 138 of 2000, before the I Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, against the petitioner, seeking eviction. The respondent pleaded that the petitioner committed wilful default in payment of the rents, denied his title and that the premises are needed for his bona fide requirement. He made a reference to the earlier proceedings that ensued between him and the petitioner, and pleaded several facts.2. The petitioner resisted the eviction petition, by pleading several grounds. He stated that the respondent is not the owner of the premises, and that there are no arrears of rent. It is also his case that the respondent owned several premises and the requirement pleaded by him is not bona fide. On a conside...
Maganti Kanakadurga Vs. Maganti Venkateswarlu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2006
Reported in: AIR2006AP259; 2006(4)ALD411
P. Swaroop Reddy, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal has been filed against the orders dated 14-7-2000 passed in O.P. No. 31 of 1996 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Narsapur.2. The appellant herein is wife and the respondent is her husband.3. Respondent filed O.P. No. 31 of 1996 for annulment of marriage and divorce under Section12(1)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') on the ground of non-consummation of marriage on account of impotency of the appellant.4. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows:(i) The marriage of the parties took place on 6-3-1996 in Sri Raja Gopala Swamy Temple, Narsapur as per Hindu Customs and Rites. Nuptials were arranged on 8-3-1996 at the house of the appellant at Moghalthur. The appellant did not co-operate with the respondent for cohabitation, hence consummation did not take place. For three days the same thing happened, on third day the appellant went away from the bedroom weeping and on questioning by the respondent, she reve...
Gurijala Savithri and ors. Vs. Gurijala Venkateswara Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALD60
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Plaintiffs in a suit for partition 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 suit was initially laid against seven defendants. 3rd defendant is the daughter of 2nd defendant. 1st defendant is the husband of the 7th defendant. 4th defendant is the brother of 7th defendant. 6th defendant is the mother of 1st defendant. Consequent upon the death of the 4th defendant, defendants 8 to 12 were brought on record as his legal representatives. 8th defendant also died during the pendency of the suit.3. The case, in brief, of the plaintiffs is that Sitaramaiah (DW2) Sambasivarao (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) and 1st defendant are brothers and are the sons of Punnarao and the 6th defendant, and were residents of Kuchipudi Village of the erstwhile Tenali Taluq. They had little or no property. Seetharamayya separated from the rest of the family long back and th...
Jonnakuti Mokshanandam Vs. the State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3034
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. The writ petitioner who is a practising advocate in the District Courts at Ongole filed this writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in appointing the respondent No. 5 as Special Public Prosecutor in the Special Court for trial of cases under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Section 24(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. The facts, in brief, are as under:Under G.O.Ms.No. 35, dated 21-4-1999, the Government appointed a retired Judge of this Court as Single Member Commission of enquiry to enquire into the practice of untouchability and atrocities against the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and suggest measures for eradication of untouchability and prevention of atrocities. One of the recommendations made by the said Committee was for preparation of District Panel of Public Prosecutors with eminent senior advocates, who have been in practic...
P. Shiva Kumar Vs. Panchanagula Venkata Nagalaxmi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD662; 2006(3)ALT425
D.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard both sides.2. For the reasons stated in the affidavit, filed in support of the application, the delay of 60 days in filing the Family Court Appeal is condoned.3. Accordingly, the application F.C.A.M.P.No. 27 of 2006 is ordered.4. This Family Court Appeal is directed against the order and decree, dt. 16-6-2005, passed by the Judge, Family Court, Warangal, allowing the application I.A.No. 24 of 2002 in I.A.No. 104 of 1996 in O.P.No. 83 of 1996, filed under Section 25(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for brevity 'the Act') seeking to enhance the maintenance amount granted to the petitioners there in from Rs. 1,000/- each to Rs. 2,000/- each from the date of petition.5. The appellant is the husband, Respondent No. 1 is the wife and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the daughter and son of the appellantand Respondent No. 1.6. For the sake of convenience, in this judgment, the appellant, Respondent No. 1 and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 will be referred to as 'the husband', ...
G. Suryanarayana Rao Vs. Commissioner of Endowments, Govt. of A.P. and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD50; 2006(3)ALT476
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri G. Vidyasagar, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services II appearing on behalf of the respondents.2. The petitioner, who has been working as an Executive Officer under the first respondent, files this writ petition, inter alia, seeking a mandamus declaring the dismissal proceedings dated 3-10-2002 as violative under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, apart from being in the teeth of the mandate as per Rule 20 of the A.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 ('the Rules for brevity) for want of enquiry and consequently seeking to set aside the proceedings dated 3-10-2002 issued by the first respondent dismissing the appellant from service and the order dated 7-5-2004 in O.A. No. 9816 of 2002 on the file of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal ('APAT' for brevity) dismissing the application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act...
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. D. Sivasankar and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC715; 2007ACJ291; 2006(4)ALD398; [2006(110)FLR781]; 2007(2)SLJ352(NULL)
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This appeal arises under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (for short 'the W.C. Act'). The 1st respondent was employed as a Driver with the 2nd respondent to work on a vehicle bearing No. AP-02-U-5269. The vehicle is insured with the appellant. On 30-5-2004, the 1st respondent was on duty to drive the vehicle from Madanapalli to Pulivenda, and on the way, it dashed a tree, and he received certain injuries. He is said to have been treated at various hospitals. He filed W.C. Case No. 2 of 2005 before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Ananthapur, (for short 'the Commissioner'), claiming a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- as compensation. He pleaded that he is unable to work normally, due to the permanent disability suffered by him.2. The 2nd respondent remained ex parte. The claim of the 1st respondent was opposed by the appellant herein. It was pleaded that the policy does not cover the liability towards the Driver,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »