Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
Mylapore Rajeswari Devi Vs. Ponnamanda Lakshmi Bai and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD212
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner presented a plaint in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, with a prayer to pass a decree for partition of Plaints-A and B-Schedule properties, in the manner pleaded by her, and for grant of future profits. Plaint-A Schedule comprised of, four items of immovable properties, and Plaint-B Schedule comprised of, nine items of jewellery. Pleading that the parties are in joint possession of the said properties, the petitioner paid Court-fee of Rs. 200/- under Sub-section (2) of Section 34 of the A.P. Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act'). The trial Court returned the plaint, through its order dated 23-6-2006, directing the petitioner herein, to pay Court fee on movable properties, on her shares, as per the Act, within the time stipulated by it. The petitioner challenges the endorsement made by the trial Court.2. Sri Eranki Phani Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that once the contents of the plaint d...
D. Narayana Reddy and ors. Vs. M. Pulla Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD401
T. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. Inasmuch as both these appeals arise out of a common judgment and as common questions of law and fact are involved, they can be disposed of together.2. O.S. No. 17 of 1992 was filed on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nagarkurnool, seeking the relief of declaration of title and for consequential injunction. The first defendant in the said suit filed O.S. No. 10 of 1992 on the file of the self-same Court seeking the identical reliefs as against the plaintiffs 1 to 3 in O.S. No. 17 of 1992. Thus, the plaintiffs 1 to 3 in O.S. No. 17 of 1992 are the defendants in O.S. No. 10 of 1992 and vice versa. A common trial was conducted by the learned Subordinate Judge in both the suits and at the culmination of trial, eventually, the suit, O.S. No. 17 of 1992, ended in dismissal and O.S. No. 10 of 1992 ended in a decree. Assailing the said judgments and decrees, two appeals came to be filed in A.S. No. 46 of 1995 as against the judgment in O.S. No. 17 of 1992 and A.S. No. ...
D. Sarala Vs. P. Pratap Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD830; 2007(2)ALT225
G. Bhavani Prasad, J.1. The common judgment of District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, dated 30-3-1994 in Original Suit Nos. 20 of 1993, 91 of 1993 and 92 of 1993 led to these appeals.2. The parties are referred to herein as the vendor, vendor's husband, vendee and subsequent purchaser respectively.3. The facts leading to the appeal are that the vendor purchased 300 square yards of land in Survey No. 262 of Hayathnagar Village and Taluk, Ranga Reddy District from D. Tanesha under a registered sale deed dated 19-8-1982, registered on 20-8-1982. The vendor entered into an agreement of sale with the vendee on 21-3-1984 agreeing to sell the said 300 square yards for Rs. 75,000/-, receiving an earnest money of Rs. 40,000/-. The vendor further received Rs. 5,000/- from the vendee on 1-4-1984 under a receipt and the balance consideration as per the agreement of sale had to be paid within 45 days from 21-3-1984.4. The vendee claimed that she approached the vendor and her husband on 30-4-1984 req...
Kammila Damodar Rao Vs. Jillepalli Thandava Krishna Murthy and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD720
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The 1st respondent filed O.S. No. 860 of 2003 in the Court of IV Additional Senior Civil Judge (FTC), Vijayawada, against the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, claiming a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/-, as damages. He pleaded that he purchased the premises, comprising of three portions, under a sale deed in the year 1998, from the petitioner, on a representation that the said premises were constructed under a valid permission obtained from the 2nd respondent and that the property is free from any defects, as to the title and permissions. According to him, the 2nd respondent issued a notice proposing to demolish the premises, and thereupon, he filed O.S. No. 501 of 2000 in the Court III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, and even while an order of temporary injunction was in force, the 2nd respondent demolished the building on 13-5-2003. He pleaded that he suffered damage, on account of misrepresentation made by the petitioner and highhanded action on the p...
State of A.P. and anr. Vs. K. Pushpalatha and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC592; 2007ACJ2038; 2006(5)ALD614; 2006(5)ALT789
G. Chandraiah, J.1. Heard both the Counsel.2. Since both the appeals arise out of same accident and the appellant - State of A.P. is common in both the appeals and also the issued raised is common, both the appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.3. CMA No. 3171/199 is filed by the State aggrieved by the order dated 5-7-1999 passed by the Court of I Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurnool in M.V.O.P. No. 423/1995. CMA No. 68/2000 is filed against the order dated 5-7-1999 passed by the same Tribunal in M.V.O.P. No. 424/1995.4. The facts with regard to deceased in both the claim petitions dying in the accident on 29-9-1993 due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing No. AP.M. 2087 and the quantum of compensation granted in both the O.Ps. by the Tribunal, is not under dispute. The two fold contention of the Counsel for the appellant - State is that as the widow of the deceased in M.V.O.P. No. 423/1995 and the son of the deceased ...
C. Pratap Reddy Vs. C. Goverdhan Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
Reported in: AIR2007AP21; 2006(6)ALD126; 2006(6)ALT95
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Revision Petition is filed by the plaintiff in O.S. No. 7 of 1996 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sangareddy. The respondent is the defendant in the said suit.2. The plaintiff filed the said suit for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with his possession of the property to an extent of Ac.4-18 guntas. The suit was decreed for an extent of Ac.4-02 guntas by granting permanent injunction against the defendant. The plaintiff, being aggrieved by the Judgment of the lower Court denying the relief to a particular portion of the land, preferredA.S. No. 23 of 2001 on the file of I Additional District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy. During the pendency of the Appeal, he filed an application covered byI.A. No. 594 of 2006under Order 23, Rule 1(3) read with 151 of C.P.C. praying the appellate Court to permit him to withdraw the suit with a leave and permission to file a comprehensive suit as against respondent for recovery o...
Karu China Appalaswamy Vs. Karu Peda Appalaswamy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD218
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This second appeal is filed by the defendant in O.S. No. 521 of 1984 on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Vizianagaram.2. The respondent, who is the elder brother of the appellant, filed the suit for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of Ac. 1.64 cents out of Ac.6.66 cents of land in Sy. No. 136/A old (Sy. No. 296/2 new) of Lakkidam Village of Vizianagaram District. He pleaded that himself and two others have jointly purchased an extent of Ac. 3-00 out of Ac.6.66 cents of land through a sale deed dated 11-11-1969, which is marked as Ex. A.1. According to him, there was a family partition between himself and the appellant herein much before the purchase of the said land and though the appellant had nothing to do with the land, he started interfering with the possession.3. The appellant filed a written statement, disputing the contents of the plaint. He pleaded that the suit schedule property was purchased with the sale proceeds of an...
D. Lakshminarayana Chetty (Died) Per Lrs. Vs. Avula Krishnaiah (Died) ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD222
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The defendants in O.S. No. 670 of 1976 in the Court of the Principal District Munsif, Madanapalle filed this second appeal.2. The transaction, which is the subject-matter of these proceedings, was between the deceased first appellant and first respondent. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to, as the appellant and the respondent.3. The suit was filed by the respondent for a decree, directing the appellant to refund a sum of Rs. 4,500/-, together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. It was pleaded that the appellant offered to sell an extent of Ac. 0.21 cents in Sy.No. 958 of Sakirevuvaripalli Village of Chittoor District for a consideration of Rs. 4,500/-. An agreement of sale is said to have been executed on 16-1-1976. It was alleged that the entire consideration for the land was paid, but at a later point of time, notices were received from the third parties, claiming rights vis-a-vis the land. The respondent got issued a notice, date...
Donald Netto and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ258
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. by A-1 to A-3 in Crime No. 470 of 2005 on the file of Chaderghat Police Station, Hyderabad, to quash the proceedings against them in the said crime.2. At the instance of the second respondent, the crime was registered for the offences under Sections 409, 420 and 429 read with 34 of I. P. C. and Sections 11(1)(a) of the Prevention of Cruelty to; Animals Act, 1960. The second respondent filed a complaint before the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and the learned Magistrate referred the matter to the Police under Section 156 of Cr. P. C. to register the crime and to investigate the case. On receipt of the said proceedings, the Police registered it as Crime No. 470 of 2005 under the penal provisions as referred above. The accused, being aggrieved by the registration of the crime against them, preferred the present Criminal Petition to quash the proceedings on the ground that th...
Undavilli Mangayamma (Died Per L.R.) Vs. Undavilli Veerayamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD157
P.S. Narayana, J.1. This Second Appeal filed by the appellant-plaintiff and the cross objections filed by the defendants are coming up before this court today for final hearing.2. Heard Sri M.S. Ramachandra Rao, the learned Counsel representing the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff-appellant in Second Appeal No. 13 of 1994 and Sri Srinivas Rao, representing Sri M. Lakshmana Sarma, the counsel for the respondents-defendants-cross objectors. This court on 29-4-1994 made the following order:In view of the substantial question of law raised in ground No. 2, this appeal is admitted. 3. The substantial questions of law raised in ground No. 2 are as hereunder:(a)Whether court below is right in refusing to grant relief of injunction to the extent of tractors in spite of unimpeached evidence of Commissioner report and admitted evidence of marks of using the passage for motor vehicles?(b) Whether the admission of defendants regarding usage of motor vehicles by plaintiff itself is n...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »