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.
Nylapally Narayana Vs. Brahmanapally Sarojini and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: 2008ACJ1384; 2006(6)ALD85; 2006(5)ALT651
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. In all these revisions, common questions of law and fact arise for consideration; therefore, they are being disposed of by this common Order.2. Petitioner and respondents are common in all the revisions. It appears that the husband of the 1st respondent (late B. Ramulu) obtained hand loans from the petitioner herein by way of executing promissory notes. The husband of the 1st respondent died in a motor accident. However, on the basis of the said promissory notes, suits were laid against the respondents and they were decreed. In the meanwhile, O.P. No. 443 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Judge, Nizamabad filed by the respondents claiming compensation for the death of late Ramulu was allowed and an Award was passed for Rs. 6,50,000/- along with interest thereon. Since the suits were decreed, the petitioner filed Execution Petitions and sought for attachment of the amount awarded in O.P. No. 443 of 2001, but they ...
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Nune Mastan and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: II(2007)ACC743; 2007ACJ1461; 2006(6)ALD226; 2006(6)ALT668
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The insurer of the vehicle (tipper) bearing No. ATN 3221 filed this C.M.A., aggrieved by the order, dated 8-4-2002, passed in O.P. No. 150 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (IV A.D.J.) Guntur.2. The first respondent filed the O.P. claiming a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation. He stated that on 19-5-1991, he boarded a van bearing No. MDA 4871 at his village with a view to go to Narasaraopet, Guntur District and at about 10.30 a.m., when the van reached Satuluru Village and crossed a lorry coming from the opposite direction, the tipper came in a rash and negligent manner and collided with the van. Five persons are said to have died and that he sustained injuries to all his limbs. He was shifted to Government Hospital, Narasaraopet and thereafter, referred to Government General Hospital, Guntur. It was pleaded that he was on bed for seven months and still his hands and legs did not become functional to the level of normalcy. Claiming t...
Union of India (Uoi), Rep. by Its General Manager, S.C. Railways Vs. S ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ1102; 2006(6)ALD116; 2006(6)ALT100
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This appeal, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act 1987, is preferred against the order, dated 16.2.2006, passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, in O.A.A. No. 333 of 1999. 2. The respondent filed the claim before the Tribunal, stating that he has fallen down from Train No. 123, Rapalle-Guntur Passenger on 29.11.1999, at Tenali Railway Station, and that his legs have come under the wheels of the train. It was alleged that the legs were cut and separated, and later on, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Guntur, by the Railway Police for treatment. He claimed compensation stating that he sustained injuries in an untoward incident.3. The appellant opposed the claim, disputing the very incident, as well as the fall of the respondent from the train. Doubt was expressed, as to the identity of the passenger. It was also alleged that even other wise, the accident has taken place, on account of the negligence of the respondent, and i...
T. Srinivasa Rao Vs. T. Venkata Rangaiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: AIR2007AP1; 2006(5)ALD823; 2006(5)ALT683
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The 1st respondent filed O.S. No. 231 of 2002 in the Court of DC Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court (Fast Track Court), Hyderabad, against his brother, the petitioner herein, and their mother, the 2nd respondent, for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The trial of the suit commenced. The 1st respondent filed an affidavit, in lieu of chief-examination as PW-1, and filed Exs.A-1 to A-19 as documents. An Advocate-Commissioner was appointed to record his cross-examination. On behalf of the 1st respondent herein, it was urged that a compromise had emerged between the parties and the cross-examination of PW-1 must be restricted only to the contents and outcome of such compromise, and not to other aspects. The petitioner objected to the same. The trial Court overruled the objection and accepted the contention of the 1st respondent herein, through its order dated 9-1-2006. C.R.P. No. 1227 of 2006 is filed against the sa...
K. Narsimhulu (Died) by Lrs. Vs. Venugopalaswamy Varu, Presiding Diety ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD428; 2006(6)ALT760
V. Eswaraiah, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decreed dated 8.11.1996 passed in O.S.No. 59 of 1996 by the District Judge, Vizianagaram. The appellant is the defendant in the suit O.S. No. 59 of 1996 filed by the respondent/ plaintiff-Devasthanam for recovery of possession of the suit schedule mentioned 13 acres of wet land from the defendant and to direct the defendant to handover vacant possession of the same with standing crops and direct the defendant to render true and correct account of the mesne profits derived from the suit lands from 30.8.1975 till delivery to the plaintiff with interest at 18% per annum and for costs of the suit. The suit was decreed with costs and future profits were directed to be determined on filing a separate application.2. The parties herein are referred to as they were arrayed in the suit.3. It is the case of plaintiff-Devasthanam that the suit schedule land admeasuring 13 acres wetland covered by Patta No. 33, Sy.No. 6 situated a ...
G.S. Oils Ltd. Vs. General Manager, District Industries Centre and anr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD442; 2007(1)ALT8
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. These writ petitions are coming up in the list at interlocutory stage and at the request of both the Counsel, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioners in all these writ petitions and the learned Government Pleader for Industries, the writ petitions are being disposed of finally.2. This writ petitions were filed praying for the reliefs that the respective petitioners are entitled to issue of the eligibility certificates for the benefits of concessional power tariff exemption of market cess, interest subsidy, refund of sale tax and reimbursement of in put on export and other incentives and concessions in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 333, dated 14-11-2003 and G.O. Ms. No. 55 dated 5.3.2004 of Industries and Commerce Department, Government of A.P., Hyderabad and consequently direct the respondents to issue the same and pass such other suitable orders.3. The first and second respondents filed counter-affidavit and resisted the same.4. Sri W.B. Srinivas, the le...
Pendoti Lingaiah Vs. Chintha Muthaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: AIR2007AP49
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner filed O.S. No.2 of 2005 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Nalgonda, against the respondents, for the relief of perpetual injunction, in respect of Ac. 10.50 guntas of land in Survey Nos. 327, 328 and 329 of Dandempally Village of Nalgonda District. He pleaded that the suit r schedule property was purchased from the original land owner, by name Akkinepally Raja Ranga Rao, through a registered sale deed, dated 22-5-2001, for a consideration of Rs. 1,55,700/-. It was also contended that the possession was delivered to him and thereafter, his name was entered in the connected revenue records. The petitioner complained that the respondents started interfering with his peaceful possession over the suit schedule property, without any basis. The petitioner filed I.A. No. 21 of 2005 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C., seeking temporary injunction. After hearing both the parties, the trial Court allowed the I.A., through its order, dated 28-7-2005....
Gajula Narasaiah and anr. Vs. Basidhar Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALT677
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This Civil Revision petition is filed against the judgment and decree, dated 28-11-2003, in A.S. No. 16 of 1998 on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nizamabad. The said appeal was filed against the judgment and decree, dated 30-9-1996 passed by the Court of District Munsif, Armoor, in O.S. No. 186 of 1988.2. Respondents 1 and 2 filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, with interest accrued thereon. They pleaded that they purchased a piece of agricultural land from one Sri Venkat Rao and his son Prabhakar Rao. Certain disputes arose in relation thereto. It was alleged that when the first respondent was not in the village, the petitioners herein and respondents 3 to 8 have approached the second respondent stating that they would resolve the disputes between them and their vendors and as a measure to abide by their decision, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each was required to be deposited by both sides....
Durga Rice Mill, Rep. by Its Managing Partner Anusuri Veerraju Vs. And ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-09-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD398
G. Bhavani Prasad, J. 1. This appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiff in O.S. No. 150 of 1987 on the file of I Additional Subordinate Judge, Kakinada is directed against the dismissal of the suit without costs by the judgment and decree, dated 07-12- 1994.2. The facts leading to the appeal are that the plaintiff filed the suit against Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board and its officials alleging that the plaintiff registered partnership firm is a trading mill with trading and milling licences maintaining statutory registers. The rice mill, milling paddy, is a consumer of Andhra Praesh State Electricity Board under service connection No. 18129 since 1984. While relea sing the supply of electricity, the Engineers of the Electricity Board supervised the installation work, checked and fixed a three phased meter and seals on the meter and box on 05-05-1984. Qualified employees of the Electricity Board periodically inspected the meter and box and noted the readings regarding the consumption...
U. Jawahar Lal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-09-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALD633; 2006(6)ALT19; [2006]134CompCas593(AP)
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for striking down second proviso to Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short 'the Act') as inserted by Act 62 of 2002. He has further prayed for setting aside order dated 22.7.2006 passed by A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad (for short 'the State Commission') in FA (SR) No. 1486 of 2005.2. Non-petitioner No. 3-Mrs. Lavudi Swarajyam filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with the allegation that she had made two deposits of Rs. 30,000/- each in M/s. Nagarjuna Finance Limited and was assured of refund after the date of maturity, but except one cheque of Rs. 5,000/-, two other cheques given by the company for refund were dishonoured by the bank. She further averred that despite legal notices, the company had not paid the amount due to her. In the complaint filed by Non-petitioner No. 3, the petitioner was impleaded as one of the non-applicants.3. By ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »