Andhra Pradesh Court January 2007 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.
Koya Ranga Reddy and ors. Vs. Koya Narayana Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD4; 2007(3)ALT689
L. Narasimha Reddy, J. 1. These two revisions are between the same parties and arise out of E.P. No. 104 of 2002, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Nalgonda.2. The 1st petitioner is the father of petitioners 2, 3 and 4. The 1st respondent is the brother of the 1st petitioner, and respondents 2 and 3 are the sons of the 1st respondent. Respondents filed O.S. No. 268 of 1997 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Nalgonda, against the petitioners for perpetual injunction, in respect of the suit schedule property. The suit was decreed ex parte on 2-4-1999. The respondents filed E.P. No. 104 of 2002, under Order 22 Rule 32 C.P.C., alleging that despite the decree for perpetual injunction, the petitioners attempted to interfere with their possession over the suit schedule property.3. Petitioners 1 and 2 were set ex parte on 16-9-2003, and petitioners 3 and 4, on 22-4-2003. Thereafter, petitioners filed applications to set aside the orders dated 25-6-2002 and 16-9-2003, with application to...
C. Sreeramulu Vs. Joint Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD51; 2007(2)ALT597
ORDERGopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the proceedings dated 05-12-1994 issued by the third respondent and confirmed by respondents 1 and 2, vide orders 16-05-1997 and 05-10-1995, respectively, as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently to set aside the same.2. The case of the petitioner is that in the year 1947 the land bearing Sy.No. 308 admeasuring Ac. 3.23 cents of Rachavetivaripalli village, Nimmanapalle Mandal, was assigned to one Nakka Musalaiah and he, in turn, sold the said land to one Smt.Erramma in the year 1960. Subsequently, the father of the petitioner purchased the said land from the said Erramma in the year 1974 and was in possession and enjoyment of the same, and after his demise, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. Be that as it may, the third respondent, invoking the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short 'the Act'), ordere...
Kolla Ravindra Vs. Kantamaneni Sri Lakshmi Sambrajyam and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD24; 2007(3)ALT382
P.S. Narayana, J.1. C.M.P. No. 2226 of 2006 is filed to vacate the interim stay granted on 2.11.2006 in C.M.P. No. 1969 of 2006. Sri P. Gopal Das, learned Counsel representing the vacate petitioner, respondent No. 1 in civil miscellaneous appeal raised a preliminary objection relating to the maintainability of the civil miscellaneous appeal. The learned Counsel placed strong reliance on the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Gurram Seetharam Reddy v. Gunti Yashoda : AIR2005AP95 2. Sri V.V. Anil Kumar, learned Counsel representing the appellant in the civil miscellaneous appeal would contend that in view of the confused legal position prevailing on the said day, the civil miscellaneous appeal had been preferred. The learned Counsel also would contend that liberty may be given to prefer a regular appeal in the light of the decision of the Full Bench referred to supra.3. Heard the Counsel.4. Though the matter is coming under the caption 'interlocutory', inasmuch as an objection r...
Sri Satyanarayana Saw Mill, L. Kota Mandal Vs. Divisional Forest Offic ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD122; 2007(4)ALT206
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner was granted licence to establish a Saw Mill in the year 2000. It was being renewed from time to time. The renewal fee is to be paid by 31st December of every year and with late fee of Rs. 250/- upto the end of February of succeeding year. For the year 2004, the petitioner paid the renewal fee of Rs. 1,000/-with late fee of Rs. 250/- on 26.3.2004 and submitted an application for renewal. No orders have been passed on the application. For the year 2005, the renewal fee was paid on 25.1.2005 with late fee of Rs. 250/-.For this year also, no orders were passed, either granting or refusing renewal. For the year 2006, the petitioner paid the renewal fee on 31.12.2005 and filed an application. On 18.3.2006, the respondents seized the Saw Mill of the petitioner on the ground that there did not exist valid renewal for the year 2004. The petitioner challenges the action of the respondents and seeks appropriate directions.2. On behalf of the respondent...
Kalyanapu Venkatalaxmi and ors. Vs. Kalyanapu Ramudu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD18; 2007(4)ALT9
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Smt. S.A. V. Ratnam, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioners and Sri Tirumala Rao, Counsel representing Ms. Hema Jaiswal, Counsel for respondent.2. C.R.P. No. 3538 of 2006 is filed as against the order dated 30-6-2006 made in LA. No. 269 of 2006 in O.S. No. 275/2000 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal. C.R.P.S.R. No. 1473/2007 is filed along with an application C.M.P. No. 379/ 2007 to dispense with the filing of certified copy of the order in I.A. No. 270/2006 in O.S. No. 275/2000 on the ground that both these applications were disposed of by a common order. Hence, dispense with application is hereby ordered.3. Inasmuch as both these CRPs. arise out of a common order made in I.A.Nos.269/2006 and 270/2006 in O.S. No. 275/2000 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, both these revisions are being disposed of by this common order,4. The respondent herein filed the aforesaid applications LA. Nos.269/2006 an...
Bhatia International Ltd. and anr. Vs. Andhra Cements Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2007
Reported in: [2008]145CompCas674(AP)
S. Ananda Reddy, J.1. This company petition is filed under Sections 433(f) and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to 'the Act'), read with Rule 95 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, seeking winding up of the respondent-company on the ground that the respondent-company failed to pay off its debts owed to the petitioner, in spite of receiving the statutory notice, and in view of the same, the respondent-company is deemed to become insolvent and is unable to pay off its debts.2. It is stated that the respondent-company was incorporated under the provisions of the Act on November 1, 1936. The authorised share capital of the respondent-company is Rs. 70 crores. The registered office of the company is situated at Chandralok Complex, S.D. Road, Secunderabad, and the administrative office of the respondent-company is located at 6-3-903/ B/1, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500 082. The main objects of the respondent-company were to manufacture and sale of cement. It is stated that t...
S. Anjaiah (Died) by Lrs. Vs. Special Court Under A.P. Land Grabbing ( ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)ALD804
B. Prakash Rao, J.1. The original petitioner, who filed this writ petition, is the un-successful applicant before the Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982. Subsequent to filing of this writ petition, the original petitioner died and petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 were brought on record as legal heirs. Later the 2nd petitioner, who is the wife of the original petitioner and who has been added as legal heir, also died on 2.1.2006. Since petitioner Nos. 3 to 5-the legal representatives were already on record and on a memo dated 9.11.2006 filed on behalf of the petitioners, the said petitioners are treated and recorded as her legal representatives.2. In the application purported to be filed under Section 8(1) of the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act before the said Special Court, the applicant sought a declaration as to ownership in respect of the schedule property, consisting of land in Sy. Nos. 656 to 660 totally admeasuring 23.30 guntas situated at Dabirpur, Med...
Construction Committee, Tippu Khan Mosque and ors. Vs. Osmania Univers ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD276; 2007(2)ALT625
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri M.V. Durga Prasad, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent.2. The petitioners, who constitute 1 and 2 as Committees and represented by the third petitioner are the respondents before the Special Court under Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, Hyderabad, filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to assail the order dated 25-11-1998 in L.G.C. No. 8 of 1993 on the file of the second respondent in pursuance of an application purported to have been filed under Section 8(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 ('the Act' for brevity) holding that they are the land grabbers.3. In the application, it is stated that the first respondent, a University is the owner of Plot Nos. 107 and 108 admeasuring 2928 square yards situated in part in Survey No. 172 of Zamisthanpur Village and...
A. Sudhakar Rao Vs. Government of A.P. Rep. by Its Secretary, Law (Leg ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALT709
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two writ petitions are filed by the same individual, and they relate to the same subject-matter. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order. For the sake of convenience, the parities are referred to, as arrayed in W.P. No. 14912 of 2006.2. The petitioner was appointed as Additional Public Prosecutor by the 1st respondent, for the Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ongole, for a period of three years, through G.O.Rt. No. 1134, dated 24-06-2003. On expiry of the term of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent placed the 3rd respondent herein as In-charge Public Prosecutor of the said Court, through proceedings dated 15-07-2006. The petitioner filed W.P. No. 14912 of 2006, challenging the same. The writ petition was admitted on 07-08-2006, and an order of interim suspension was passed on the same day.3. The 1st respondent issued G.O.Rt. No. 1768, dated 27-11-2006, placing the 3rd respondent as In-charge, in the place of the petitioner...
Yarn Sales Depot, Vs. Akkamamba Taxtiles Ltd., a Public Limited Compan ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALD465
P.S. Narayana, J.1. A.S. No. 103 of 1992 is preferred by the defendant M/s Yara Sales Depot, Shahapur, Belgaum, Karnataka, as against the Order made in O.S. No. 96 of 1982 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Tanuku. Likewise, A.S. No. 2108 of 1991 is filed by M/s Harison & Company, Yarn Merchants at 79 Modge, Belgaum, Karnataka, as against the Order made in O.S. No. 97 of 1982 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Tanuku. 2. The respondents in both these appeals -the plaintiff in both the suits is M/s Sree Akkamamba Textiles Limited, a Public Limited Company, Venkatarayapuram, Tanuku, West Godavari district. These suits were filed by the respondent- plaintiff for recovery of the amounts on the strength of commercial transactions.3. On the respective pleadings of the parties, the learned Judge having settled the issues, recorded oral and documentary evidence and ultimately, came to the conclusion, recording positive findings, that the plaintiff in both the suits would be entitled to their res...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »