Andhra Pradesh Court October 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.
Gadu Appala Naidu Vs. Commissioner of Endowments Department, Governmen ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD650
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court issued rule nisi on 12.4.2007 and in W.P.M.P. No. 21121/2006 the following order had been made:In this application, an interim direction is sought to respondents not to conduct public auction for leasing out the rights on usufruct of cashew tope situated in S. No. 184 of Chippada Village. The second respondent filed counter stating that auction was already conducted on 25.8.2004. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to pass any order. If ultimately, petitioners succeed, appropriate orders can be passed for refund of the money deposited by him.The WPMP is accordingly dismissed.Post the writ petition for final hearing in the last week of June, 2007.2. The writ petitioner, Appala Naidu, filed the present writ petition for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the order passed by 2nd respondent in R.C. No. 422/04 dated 30.6.2006 cancelling the lease granted in favour of petitioner by 1st respondent in D. Dis. No. L1/ 51641/04 dated ...
Pabbathi Venkataramaiah Chetty Vs. Pabbathi N. Rathnamaiah Chetty and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD758
D. Appa Rao, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by D.1 against passing of the final decree in I.A. No. 140 of 2000 in O.S. No.3 of 1996, on the file of II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District dated 2.6.2006 approving the report of the Advocate Commissioner dividing the suit schedule properties in terms of preliminary decree and to handover respective shares to the plaintiffs and the defendant.2. The essential facts leading upto this appeal are as follows:3. The 1st plaintiff the father and the 2nd plaintiff the son filed the suit against the 1st defendant another son, the appellant herein and others, for partition of the plaint schedule non-residential premises by name Sree Lodge, a three storied structure bearing D. Nos. 13/293, 13/294 and 13/295 into three equal shares and for possession of two such shares to them. The father and sons purchased the said property under registered sale deed dated 5.5.1966 and constructed the lodge after obtaining permission from the ...
Dr. K. Babu Vs. Cantonment Executive Officer and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD330
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Dr. K. Babu, writ petitioner, filed the present writ petition praying for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent in rejecting his application for permission for construction of compound wall, vide Lr. No. EB/P. No. 32/Seva Mandal CHS/EM' pally 38/2132, dated 13.6.2006, on the ground that he has not obtained No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Hyderabad District Collector and Airport Authority of India as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents to accord permission for construction of compound wall in respect of the property in question forthwith, and to pass such other suitable orders.2. A counter-affidavit is filed by the first respondent.Sri P.R. Prasad, learned Counsel representing the petitioner, had taken this Court through Sections 2(4) and 194 of the Cantonments Act, 1924 (for short hereinafter called 'the Act', for the purpose of convenience) and also had drawn the attention to the co...
Estate Officer and Additional Divisional Railway Manager, South Centra ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD772
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court issued rule nisi on 27.07.2006.2. Heard Sri Gangarami Reddy, the learned Counsel, representing the petitioner and Sri Anantha Krishna, the learned Counsel, representing the respondent.3. The writ petition is filed by the petitioner for issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction calling for the records relating to the judgment and decree in A.S.No. 213 of 2002 dated 20.12.2005 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari and to quash the same and to pass other suitable orders.4. It is stated that the respondent is in unauthorized occupation of 184.8 sq.meters of land. The petitioner Railways issued notice under Section 4(1) of the Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorized occupants) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience) to the respondent. After considering the explanation submitted by the respondent the petitioner ordered eviction from the Railway land. Ass...
Chekka Venkata Chenna Kesava Sudheer S/O Sri. C.C. Kesava Rao Vs. the ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD(Cri)27; 2008(1)ALT(Cri)127
ORDERG.V. Seethapathy, J.1. This, petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C. No. 1632 of 2003 on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the additional public prosecutor representing the second respondent-State and perused the records.3. The Drugs Inspector filed a complaint before the learned Magistrate alleging that on 18-08-2002 he inspected the premises of the petitioner's shop M/s. Bhagawan Medical & General Stores (Ayurvedic), and lifted the samples of Ozomen Forte capsules (Ayur) batch No. 5501 and that on analysis by the government analist it wgs found to be spurious and adulterated as it contains allopathic drug Sildenafil Citrate varying from 35 gm to 46.22 gms vide report dated 25-09-2002. It is also averred in the complaint that the drug inspector visited the manufacturing unit of A-1 firm and collected 4 strips of Ozomen forte Drug (Ayurv...
B.J. Services Company Middle East Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-2007
Reported in: (2007)10VST597(AP)
ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The relevant assessment years for the purpose of this writ petition are 2004-05 and 2005-06. Counter has also been filed and we have also perused the record for the year 2004-05.3. Already assessment has been made for the year 2004-05 and according to the petitioner against the said assessment, an appeal is filed, which has been heard and reserved for orders by the appellate authority. In this writ petition challenge is made to the attachment order, dated July 2, 2007, passed in terms of Section 27(2)(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, 'the Act'). Although the impugned proceedings of attachment referred to Section 29 of the Act, but it appears that it was a typographical mistake, because Section 29 of the Act does not give any such power to the Commercial Tax Officer and it has been conceded by the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes that the impugned proceedings are under Sect...
S. Ravi Kiran Vs. Secretary, Ministry of Company Affairs and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD730; [2008]141CompCas66(AP); (2008)2CompLJ153(AP); [2008]82SCL421(AP)
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Venkatesh Gupta, representing Sri K. Ramakrishna, counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Vijaya Bhaskar Moola, representing respondents Nos. 1 and 2.Sri Venkatesh Gupta, representing Sri K. Ramakrishna, would contend that in the light of Sections 235, 236 and 237 of the Companies Act, 1956, appropriate directions can be issued even by a writ court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Counsel had also taken this Court through the respective stands taken by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and also the second respondent in the counter-affidavit filed in response to the affidavit filed by the petitioner.2. On the contrary, Sri Vijaya Bhaskar Moola had taken this Court through the specific stand taken in the counter-affidavit by the Registrar of Companies in charge, the second respondent, and would contend that the remedy, if any, available to the petitioner is to invoke the Company Law Board, in accordance with the...
Tatipalli Vazaramma Vs. Revuri Devaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD753; 2008(1)ALT442
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This revision petition is filed by the Decree Holder against the order in E.A. No. 16 of 2007 in E.A. No. 19 of 2005 in ; E.P. No. 7 of 2005 in O.S. No. 131 of 2004 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kamareddy, which reads as follows:Perused the petition and counter. As can be seen from Section 5 of Limitation Act it is not applicable to any of the provisions of Order 21 of C.P.C. In view of the legal provision the present petition to condone the delay in filing petition under Section 21, Rule 106 CPC is not maintainable.Hence the petition is dismissed as not maintainable under law.2. The lower Court observed that Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable to any of the provisions of Order 21 of C.P.C.3. In Damodaran Pillai v. South Indian Bank Ltd. : AIR2005SC3460 , the Supreme Court held:The Civil Court in absence of any express power cannot condone the delay. For the purpose of condonation of delay in absence of applicability of the pro...
Dr. Pinna N.R. Vs. Canara Bank and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD681; 2009(1)ALT59
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. Feeling dissatisfied with the conditional relief granted by the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Hyderabad (for short, 'the Tribunal') in I.A. No. 501 of 2005 in M.A.I.R. No. 140 of 2005 in I.A. No. 464 of 2004 in R.P. No. 15 of 2004 (O.A. No. 849 of 2001), the petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. A perusal of the record shows that the application jointly filed by respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 for recovery of Rs. 23,97,11,499-72 Ps. under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short, 'the Act'), which was registered as OA No. 849 of 2001 was allowed by the Tribunal on 17.11.2003 and Recovery Certificate was issued for Rs. 34,66,55,423-72 Ps.3. The petitioner, who was one of the Directors of the borrower-M/s Midwest Iron and Steel Company Limited (respondent No. 4 herein) and who gave security of his personal assets for repayment of loan taken by respondent No. 4, filed miscel...
D. Appa Rao and 24 ors. Vs. Peela Krishna Appa Rao and 5 ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-26-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALT462
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred by the respondents 2 to 6 and 8 to 27 in Transfer O.P. No. 1209 of 2004 on the file of the District Judge, Viskhapatnam.2. The respondents 1 to 4 herein are the petitioners in the transfer O.P. The petitioners in the said T.O.P. are the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 65 of 1999 on the file of IX Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Visakhapatnam, for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit schedule property.3. The vendor of the plaintiffs filed Land Grabbing Case No. 6 of 2000 on the file of the Principal District Court-cum-Land Grabbing Tribunal, Visakhapatnam and it is pending. O.S. No. 65 of 1999 was pending on the file of IX Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam. During pendency of those matters, the plaintiffs filed the said T.O.P. before the District Judge, Visakhapatnam under Section 24 of C.P.C to withdraw O.S. No. 65 of 1999 from the Court of IX Additional District Judge (Fast Tra...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »