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.
Buddepu Khogayya Vs. Buddepu Kamalu and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2006
Reported in: I(2007)DMC451
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Criminal Revision case is filed against the order passed on 5th December, 2000 by the learned Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Inchapuram in M.C. No. 10 of 1999.2. The petitioner herein is the respondent and the 1st respondent herein is the petitioner before the Court below. The parties will be referred to as arrayed before the Court below for the sake of convenience.3. Petitioner is the husband and the respondent is the wife before the Court below.4. The respondent, during the subsistence of marriage with his 1st wife, married the petitioner and during their wedlock, she gave birth to the two children. The petitioner filed M.C. No. 10 of 1999 claiming maintenance that the respondent married her and in pursuance of the said wedlock, she gave birth to two children. The lower Court after considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced by both parties, awarded Rs. 400 towards maintenance. The respondent being aggrieved by the order dated 5th December,...
Mamidala Suresh Babu and ors. Vs. Tirumalasetti Krishnamurthy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD605; 2006(3)ALT250
G. Chandraiah, J.1. Though notice is served none appeared for the respondents. Heard the counsel for the appellants.2. Aggrieved by the conditional order of attachment before judgment under Order 38 Rule 5(3) of C.P.C. passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Parchur in I.A. No. 255/2004 in O.S. No. 19/2004 dated 12-8-2004, the defendants in the suit filed this appeal.3. For the sake of convenience the parties will be referred as per their array in the original suit.4. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs filed suit in O.S. No. 19/2004 for recovery of amounts under promissory notes executed by the 1st defendant. 1st defendant borrowed the amount and the defendants 2 to 4 are his two sons and a married daughter. As the amount was not paid in spite of demands, the suit for recovery of amount was filed. Alleging that the 1st defendant as a manager of the joint family comprising his two sons and one married daughter, incurred debts and in order to defeat and delay his vali...
Vajjala Sree Rama Murthy and anr. Vs. Tadepalli Narayana Murthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: AIR2006AP315; 2006(3)ALT621
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two revisions are filed by the same petitioners assailing the orders passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda rejecting the applications filed under Sections 45 of the Indian Evidence Act.2. The respondent filed O.S. Nos. 49 and 50 of 2002 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda against the petitioners, for recovery of amounts on the basis of certain promissory notes. The trial of the suit commenced and the recording of evidence is said to have been completed. At that stage, the petitioners filed I.A. Nos. 40 and 41 of 2006 under Section 45 of the Evidence Act with a prayer to send the document to the Forgery Detection Cell, Indian Security Press, Nasik inviting an opinion as to the date and year of manufacture or printing of the stamps on the promissory notes. The applications were opposed by the respondent. The trial Court dismissed the said applications through separate orders dated 10-3-2006. Hence, these revisions.3. Sri P.R....
M.S.K. Narayana Rao and ors. Vs. Registrar of Co-operative Societies, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD34; 2006(3)ALT528
ORDER1. The Guntur Co-operative Urban Bank Limited (for short, 'the Bank'), which was originally registered under the provisions of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 was converted into one under the provisions of the A.P. Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act, 1995 (for short, 'AP MACS Act) on 6-11-1998. In pursuance of the elections held under the provisions of the AP MACS Act, the petitioner in W.P.No. 12100 of 2004 was elected as Chairman and the petitioners in W.P.No. 14222 of 2004 were elected as the Directors and they assumed charge on 28-5-2004. While so, the impugned order dated 7-7-2004 was issued by the 1st respondent-Registrar of Co-operative Societies, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 36-A of the AP MACS Act, thereby superseding the Board of Directors of the Bank and appointing the District Co-operative Officer, Guntur as the Special Officer/Administrator to manage the affairs of the Bank initially for a period of one year.2. The said order is under ...
B. Vidyasagar Vs. Depot Manager, Apsrtc and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD507; 2006(4)ALT280; [2006(110)FLR938]
B. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri P. Sridhar Rao, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Smt. P. Rajani Reddy, learned Government Pleader for APSRTC.2. This appeal is at the instance of the unsuccessful 1st respondent-workman assailing the order dated 28-10-2005 in allowing the writ petition in W. P. No. 14079 of 2005 filed by the respondent-Corporation, seeking the correctness of the award passed in I.D. No. 149 of 2003, dated 11-11-2004.3. A few facts which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the 1st respondent-workman, appellant herein, has been working as a Conductor with the respondents-Corporation. While so, on certain charges of having committed ticket irregularities, he faced the departmental enquiry and was removed from service and in appeal, the appellate authority, as per order dated 19-10-2002, though confirmed the finding of the primary authority in regard to the charges as framed, however, considering the past good record, took a lenient view...
Kalakonda Prakash Vs. Billakanti Vaman Murthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALD458; I(2008)BC68
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S.No. 81 of 2004, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy, filed this revision. He feels aggrieved by an order dated 26-9-2005, passed by the trial Court, refusing to receive a document in evidence.2. Petitioner filed the suit against the respondent, for recovery of certain amount. He pleaded that the respondent borrowed a sum of Rs. 20,000/- from him, and executed a mortgage deed, dated 28-11-2001, as a security for repayment. According to him, even while the said mortgage was in force, the respondent borrowed a further sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- on 8-1-2002, and an agreement is said to have been executed to the said amount, on the same day, in relation to that amount.3. The trial of the suit commenced. The petitioner intended to introduce the agreement, dated 8-1-2002, into evidence. The respondent raised an objection, stating that the document is inadmissible in evidence, since it is a deed of mortgage, but not registered. Throug...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Rep. by Its Divl. Manager Vs. C. Malli ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ1453; 2006(4)ALD658; 2006(4)ALT663
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The insurer of a vehicle, owned by the 6th respondent herein, is the appellant. Respondents 1 and 2 are the parents, respondent No. 3 is the sister and respondents 4 and 5 are the brothers of late C. Raju. They filed O.P. No. 607 of 2000, in the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Anantapur, claiming a compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-, as compensation. They pleaded that the deceased was working as a cleaner on a lorry owned by the 6th respondent, and insured with the appellant, and was being paid a sum of Rs. 1,000/- towards salary and Rs. 50/- per day, towards batta. It was alleged that on 28-4-1999, the deceased was proceeding on the lorry, and when the driver applied sudden brake in a rash and negligent manner, he fell down and died instantly. The deceased was said to be 21 years old, when he died. After finding that the accident took place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the lorry, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs...
Krishna Rai Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC667; 2007ACJ113; 2006(3)ALD624; 2006(3)ALT220
G. Chandraiah, J.1. Heard both the counsel. 2. Since both the appeals are filed against the same award i.e., one by the Insurance Company and other by the claimant, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 3. Not being satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Court of Chief Judge-cum-Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in O.P. No. 116/2001 dated 19-11 -2000, the claimant filed the appeal in C.M.A. No. 542/2003. 4. Aggrieved by the above said award in granting compensation by fastening the liability on the Insurance Company in spite of policy being cancelled on the ground of non-payment of premium, the appeal in C.M.A. No. 607/2003 is filed. 5. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as claimant and the Insurance Company. 6. The facts with regard to causing of the accident on 22-12-2000 by the lorry bearing No. AP 12-U-1688 due to rash and negligent driving of its driver and the claimant receiving injuries in the sa...
K. Maruthi Mallikarjuna Rao Vs. Special Officer and Competent Authorit ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALT800
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. This is an appeal for setting aside order dated 31 -3-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby he dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant for quashing notification dated 6-9-2005 issued by the respondent under Section 10(3) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act').2. The appellant claims to have purchased 1000 square yards of land bearing Plot No. 67 out of Survey No. 45 (Part), Guttala Begumpet Village (Kavuri Hills), Hyderabad from Sri K.V. Jaganmohan Rao, vide registered sale -deed dated 6-1-1990. He is said to have constructed a house in the year 2000 after obtaining permission from Serilingampally Municipality.3. The appellant filed writ petition questioning the legality of notification dated 6-9-2005 issued by the respondent declaring that the land in question shall be deemed to have been acquired by the State Government and vested in it with effect from 15-9-2005 free from all encumbrances. In the affidavit...
M. Seshagiri Rao Vs. M. Rukkamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALT250
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri M. Rama Rao, the learned Counsel representing the petitioner and Sri T.P. Acharya, the learned Counsel representing the respondents.2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 21-4-2005 and inasmuch as the respondents were served and the learned Counsel Sri T.P. Acharya entered appearance. The C.R.P. is being disposed of finally.3. Sri Rama Rao, the learned Counsel representing the petitioner had taken this Court through the contents of the document in question and had pointed out that it was specified in the document both in the beginning and also in the concluding portion as Will and in view of the same, the intention of the testator is clear, even otherwise, the learned Counsel would submit that the petitioner as plaintiff instituted the suit for cancellation of the preliminary decree made in O.S. No. 51 of 1964 dated 8-7-1965 and final decree made on 31-1-1972. The learned Counsel also would submit that the petitioner filed this document-the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »