Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Lallita Tyagi Vs. M. Chandrakala and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD740
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Revision petitioner filed the suit through her General Power of Attorney seeking cancellation of a sale deed and for other reliefs, initially against respondents 1 and 2. Subsequently third respondent was added as the third defendant. The General Power of Attorney of the revision petitioner was examined in part as a witness on her behalf. Meanwhile, respondents filed a petition under Rules 1 and 2 of Order III read with Section 151 CPC to eschew the evidence of the General Power of Attorney of the revision petitioner on the ground that he cannot depose on behalf of the revision petitioner, which was allowed by the order under revision. Hence, this revision.2. The main contention of the learned Counsel for revision petitioner is that the only embargo placed on the General Power of Attorney giving evidence is in respect of the facts which are exclusively in the knowledge of the donor of the Power of Attorney but not with regard to the facts which are within his...
Alladi Krishna Murthy Vs. the State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4418
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Criminal Revision Case has been preferred by A-2 in C.C. No. 190 of 1995 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Siddipet, Medak District.2. A-1 and himself were prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 27(b) and 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act'). After recording the evidence, the trial Court came to a conclusion that the alleged offences against both the accused are proved. Accordingly, they were convicted for the offence under Section 27(b) of the Act and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-and they were also convicted for the offence under Section 28 of the Act. and sentenced each of them to undergo R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer S.I. for two months under each count. The accused, being aggrieved by the Judgment of the trial Court dated 28-3-1998, preferred Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 1998 on the...
Sri Mohd. Yousuf Quershi (Died) as Per Lrs Smt. Zahida Begum and 4 ors ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD420; 2006(6)ALT768
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J. 1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the judgment, dated 11-08-2004, passed in R.A. No. 117 of 2000 by the Additional C hief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, setting aside the dismissal order, dated 23- 03-1998, in R.C.No. 405 of 1995 on the file of the III Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad.2. Petitioners are the tenants and the respondent is the landlady. The eviction petition filed by the land lady in R.C.No. 405 of 1995 on the file of the III Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, seeking eviction of the original sole tenant, Yousuf Qureshi, on the ground of bona fide requirement of the premises was dismissed by order dated 23-03-1988. Aggrieved by the same, the landlady filed R.A.No. 117 of 2000 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad and the Rent Control Appellate Authority by order dated 11-08-2004 allowed the same on the ground that the said premises is bonafidely required by the landlady for s...
P. Raghavender Vs. the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh rep. by th ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALD566
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. This petition is directed against G.O. Ms. No. 99, Law (LA & J.SC.F) Department, dated 25-7-2005 as amended on 30-7-2005, whereby the Government of Andhra Pradesh retired the petitioner, who was a member of the Andhra Pradesh State Higher Judicial Service, on attaining the age of 58 years by invoking proviso to Section 3(1-A) of the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act, 1984 (for short, the Act')-2. The petitioner's date of birth is 11-7-1947. He joined judicial service of the State of Andhra Pradesh as District Munsif on 16-8-1976. He was promoted as Sub-Judge on 31-8-1987, as District and Sessions Judge Grade-II with effect from 6-1-1992 and as District and Sessions Judge, Grade-I with effect from 8-4-2002. In terms of the substantive part of Section 3(1A) of the Act, as amended on 22-7-1998, he would have retired from service on 31-7-2007, but, on the recommendations made by High Court, the State Government issued G.O. Ms. N...
Abyudaya Educational Society Rep. by Secretary and Correspondent and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD1; 2006(5)ALT767; 2006(6)AIRKarR606(FB)(AP).
ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. These three writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order as they raise common questions of law and fact. We have heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and also learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.2. These matters have come to the Full Bench on a reference made by a Division Bench. The Division Bench, while hearing the matters on 26-12-2005, by noting a Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in Vasishta English Medium School v. Basinikonda Gram Panchayat and Anr. : 1996(3)ALT553 , expressed the view that the matters are required to be heard by a Full Bench. Therefore, the matters have been placed before this Full Bench.3. It is a short controversy as to whether Rules framed under Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Gram Panchayats Act of 1964') were still in force and could be applied even after enactment of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter ...
Uppala Venkayamma Vs. Mahankali Pullaiah (Died) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD48; 2007(1)ALT65
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order and decree, dated 7-11 -2002, passed in R.C.C.M.A No. 119 of 1994 in R.C.C. No. 185 of 1998 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada.2. Petitioner is the tenant and the respondents 1and 2 who are thehusband and wife died and their only son, the 3rd respondent, was brought on record before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, The landlords, Mahankali Pullaiah and Mahankali Kotamma, filed R.C.C.No. 185 of 1998 on the file of he Rent Controller, Vijayawada, under Sections 10(2)(i), 10(2)(ii)(b), 10(2)(iv) and 10(3)(c) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for brevity, 'the Act'), on the grounds of wilful default in payment of rent and for additional accommodation, and the Rent Controller dismissed the same by order dated 26-4-2000 against which the landlords filed R.C.A.No. 119 of 1994 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada and during...
B. Ramakrishna Setty and ors. Vs. B. Sreenivasa Murthy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD369
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Aggrieved by the order directing them to pay poundage, revision petitioners preferred this revision.2. First respondent filed the suit for partition and separate possession of his 8/42nd share in the plaint schedule properties. After contest a preliminary decree was passed on 8-7-1993. In a petition filed by the first respondent for passing a final decree in terms of the preliminary decree the trial Court appointed a Commissioner. He filed a report informing the Court that it is not practicable to divide item Nos. 1 to 4 of plaint schedule, and so the trial Court, with the consent of the parties, held an auction in between the parties to the suit in respect of those items, in which the first respondent became the highest bidder in respect of items 1, 2 and 4 for Rs. 26,25,000/-. That sale was confirmed later. Thereafter some events took place. But they are not relevant for disposal of this revision. When the second revision petitioner took an objection that i...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Muppala Anasuryanvathi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-2006
Reported in: 2008ACJ1427; 2007(1)ALD798; 2007(6)ALT466
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Since both the appeals arise out of the same award, they are being disposed of by a common order. For the sake of convenience, parties to the appeals would hereinafter be referred to as they are arrayed in the claim petition.2. Claimants, who are the widow, children and parents of Nageswara Rao (the deceased) filed the claim petition alleging that when the deceased was proceeding as a pillion rider on the Scooter ABW 5015 belonging to the second respondent, being driven by the first respondent and insured with the third respondent, it dashed against the bullock-cart belonging to the 5th respondent being driven by the 4th respondent in a rash and negligent manner, resulting in the deceased falling down from the scooter and receiving injuries and later succumbing to those injuries. Since the deceased was aged about 38 years and was earning Rs. 2,000/- per month from various sources, they are entitled to Rs. 9,00,000/- as compensation from the respondents.3. The...
Krishnaiah and ors. Vs. Government of A.P. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD89
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. The petitioners who are working in Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam (TTD) as Head Vigilance Guards and Jamedars, have filed this writ petition praying for the following relief:To issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 1 to implement the recommendations made vide Roc. TL5/3933=58/94, dated 18.2.1997 by respondent No. 2 and make necessary amendments to T.T.D. Service Rules by including the post of Security Inspector in accordance with the method of recruitment and qualifications as suggested and recommended.2. The petitioners state that on the representation made by them to the 2nd respondent, namely the Executive Officer that since they have been working as Head Vigilance Guards and Jamedars for the last more than 15 years, they should be given promotion as Security Inspectors, the 2nd respondent placed the matter before the Board of Trustees of TTD, who passed a resolution on 10.9.1995 approving the proposal for conversion of three posts of Vigilance and ...
Shaik Ali Saheb and anr. Vs. K. Rajashree and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ603; 2006(6)ALD59; 2006(6)ALT122
L. Narasimha Reddy, J. 1. The claimants in O.P.No. 365 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Acc ident Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Miryalguda filed this M.A.C.M.A., aggrieved by the dismissal of the O.P., through order, dated 03.10.2005.2. The appellants filed the O.P. stating that their son, by name Shaik Masthan Ali, who was aged about 18 years and working as a tin maker, boarded a lorry bearing No. ABK 9547 on 29.11.2002 along with his goods at Hyderabad, in order to go to his native village. The lorry is said to have dashed against a stationed lorry bearing No. ATS 6257. It was alleged that the said lorry was parked by the side of National Highway No. 9 near Kaithapuram Village, with steel rods protruding outside, and that at about 2:00 a.m., when the lorry bearing No. ABK 9547 passed by its side, the steel rods pierced into the cabin and their son died. They claimed a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation, against the owner of the lorry bearing No. ATS ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »