Andhra Pradesh Court November 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.
S. Ramireddy (Died) Per L.Rs. Vs. Usthepalli Krishna Murthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALT585
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Respondent filed the suit for recovery of money based on a promissory note executed by Rami Reddy, father of appellants, in his favour, after issuing a notice of demand to the appellants. In the written statement filed by them, appellants took a plea that after receipt of the registered notice they convened a panchayat, because to their knowledge their father did not execute any promissory note. Their case is that they did not send a reply to the notice of the respondent inasmuch as he admitted in the panchayat that he would not institute a suit for recovery of the amount as the promissory note is barred by time and so it is clear that the endorsements on the reverse of the' promissory note are forged and in any event no decree can be passed against them as they did not inherit any property from their father.2. In support of his case, the respondent examined himself as P.W. 1 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.6. 7th appellant only was examined as D.W. 1 on behalf of th...
Mudimela Konda Reddy Vs. Gona Nagi Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD66; 2008(2)ALT17
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri K. Ramesh, representing Sri S.R. Sanku, learned Counsel for the revision petitioner. Though the respondents had been served, none represents the respondents.2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 05.11.2007. The petitioner as plaintiff filed the present civil revision petition under Article 227 of the constitution of India being aggrieved of an order made in I.A. No. 126 of 2006 in O.S. No. 9 of 2006, dated 11.06.2007. The said application was filed under Order 11 Rules 8 and 11 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter in short referred 'the Code' for the purpose of convenience) praying for a relief to direct the respondents to report to the Court about the plinth area of respective portions and the floors in their occupation to whom they had leased out and how much rent they have been collecting and how much area is in their personal occupation etc., and the other particulars to enable the petitioner to claim mesne profit...
Smt. K. Anjamma @ Anjali Devi and anr. Vs. K. Sudarshan Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD149; 2008(3)ALT724
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This petition is filed with a prayer to transfer O.S. No. 485 of 1994, pending in the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, to the Court of II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, so that it can be tried along with O.S. No. 912 of 2006, pending in that court.The 1st respondent filed the suit against respondents 14 and 15, for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. Subsequently, respondents 2 to 13 came to be added as parties, on the basis of the orders passed in different applications filed from time to time.2. The petitioners got themselves impleaded as defendants in O.S. No. 485 of 1994, as defendants 11 to 13, on 25-11-2003 by filing an IA, under Order I Rule 10 CPC. After getting themselves impleaded, the petitioners filed a written statement as well as a counter claim. They pleaded that several items of immovable property were not included in the suit schedule and claimed that the prop...
Singareni Colleries Company Limited Rep. by Its General Manager Vs. C. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD829; 2008(1)ALT256
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner initiated proceedings for acquisition of an extent of Ac. 838.13 guntas of land in Adrial Village of Manthani Mandal for undertaking the coal mining activity. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') was published on 28.6.1985 and it was followed by a notification under Section 6 of the Act on 1.8.1985. An award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 3.8.1987.2. The Land Acquisition Officer referred the matter under Section 30 of the Act to the Civil Court in respect of an extent of Ac. 73.35 guntas. He doubted the title of one Mr. J. Gopal Rao, who figured as a claimant before him vis-a-vis the said land. The reference made by the Special Deputy Tahsildar, the second respondent herein under Section 30 of the Act was taken up by the court of Senior Civil Judge, Manthani as O.P. No. 9 of 1988. The first respondent herein figured as one of the contestants. I.A. No. 568 of 1988 was filed j...
Kalasani Venkata Laxmi W/O. Mukunda Reddy Vs. Bommineni Aruna W/O. Jan ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-2007
Reported in: AIR2008AP107; 2008(2)ALD755; 2008(2)ALT14
ORDERGopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. The first respondent herein instituted O.S. No. 8 of 1986 seeking partition of the plaint schedule properties and for possession of her l/10th share against the second respondent. During the pendency of the suit, the second respondent died and his legal representatives, i.e, the petitioner and respondents 3 to 10 were brought on record. After contest, the trial court passed a preliminary decree on 06.09.1994. Thereafter, an application for passing of final decree was passed, and the trial court, after appointment of an Advocate/Commissioner and submission of the report by the said Advocate/Commissioner, passed a final decree on 23.12.1999. Though in the judgment, particular shares were allotted to the first respondent and the tenth respondent, while drafting the decree, the said shares were altered showing the share allotted to the first respondent/plaintiff in favour of the tenth respondent and the share allotted to the tenth respondent in favour of th...
B. Venkataramana Vs. Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD335; 2008(1)ALT578
ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. The petitioner, who was the licensee to sell Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor (IL & FL) by shop in respect of Shop No. 2, Ward No. 2 of Madhira Village, Khammam district for the period from 1.7:2005 to 30.6.2006, filed the present writ petition for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondents in collecting licence fee for the period from 1.7.2005 to 30.11.2005 as illegal. He also sought for a consequential direction to refund the licence fee paid for the said period.2. The undisputed facts are stated as under:Respondent No. 2 issued notification, published in Khammam District Gazette No. 19 of 2005 dated 26.5.2005 calling for tenders for grant of lease of right to sell IL & FL by shop under Rule 5 of the Ahdhra Pradesh Excise (Lease of Right of Selling by Shop and Conditions of License) Rules 2005 (for short 'the Rules'). The petitioner filed his tender for shop No. 2, Ward No. 2 of Madhira village and he became the highest bidder in the aucti...
Ajantha Industries Vs. District Educational Officer
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD73; 2008(1)ALT610; 2008(2)ARBLR171(AP)
ORDERGopal Krishna Tamada, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the Docket Order, dated 21.9.2007 passed in E.P. (SR). No. 5221 of 2007 on the file of the District Judge, Warangal, by which, the E.P. filed by the petitioner for execution of the decree passed by the Chairman, A.P. Industrial Facilitation Council & Commission of Industries, Hyderabad, was returned at the S.R. stage, on the ground that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner M/s. Ajantha Industries, is a registered manufacturer and supplier of steel furniture (Almirahs, tables and racks). When the respondent-District Educational Officer, placed an order for supply of steel furniture, the petitioner supplied him the furniture on credit basis. Though several requests were made for payment of dues, the respondent failed to pay the amount. Then, the petitioner approached Andhra Pradesh Industrial Facilitation Council and filed a petition for payment of Rs. 2,...
Kaneez Fathima and anr. Vs. Samru Sultana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD284; 2008(3)ALT538
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiffs in O.S. No. 265 of 1999 are the appellants in the second appeal. The suit is filed, for the relief of perpetual injunction, against the respondents. The appellants pleaded that the suit schedule property, bearing House No. 3-6-13, situated at Adarshnagar, Karimnagar, was owned by one Mr. Ali Nawaz and he sold the same in favour of the 2nd appellant on 5.10.1998. The 2nd appellant is said to have gifted the suit schedule property in favour of the 1st appellant, under a gift deed, dated 6.4.1999. They complained that the respondents started interfering with the possession over the property, without any basis.2. Respondents filed written statement opposing the claim of the appellants. It was pleaded that the father of defendants 2 and 3, by name Ali Mohammed, was the original owner of the property and he, in turn, had gifted the same, orally, in favour of the 1st defendant. O.S. No. 515 of 1989 was filed by the 1st defendant, against he...
United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Koduru Bhagyamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD273; 2008(2)ALT764
ORDERBilal Nazki, Acting C.J.1. This case has come before this Court on a reference made by a learned single Judge of this Court as it was contended before the learned single Judge by the appellant that as the trailer in which the deceased was traveling was not insured, although it was attached to the tractor which was insured, therefore no liability could be fastened upon the insurer.2. The appeal arises out of the award granting compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- to the legal representatives of the deceased who died in a motor accident.3. The appellant placed reliance on judgments of this Court reported in Oriental Insurance Co. Limited v. Janarasupalli Kotiratnamma and Oriental Insurance Co. Limited v. Laxmanna : 2004(4)ALD732 . The respondents/claimants placed reliance on a judgment of this Court reported in New India Assurance Co. Limited v. Mamidi Mallamma : 2001(4)ALD8 , which according to the respondents, lays down that if one among the tractor and trailer is insured, the liability...
Srinidhi Electro Mechanics Rep. by Its Proprietor, M. Upendra Reddy Vs ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD89; 2008(5)ALT579
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner, Sri A. Rajashekar Reddy, learned Assistant Solicitor General, representing respondent No. 1, and Sri Wajid Ali Kamil, learned Counsel representing respondent No. 2.2. This Court issued Rule Nisi on 22.02.2007 and in W.P.M.P. No. 4163 of 2007 interim direction was granted. Counter affidavits are filed by both respondents 1 and 2.3. The writ petitioner, Srinidhi Electro Mechanics, represented by its Proprietor filed the present Writ petition for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the first respondent contained in its letter No. DMRL/LC/WA/1354/SCRAP, dated 08.02.2007, in awarding the contract of sale of MS & SS Scrap to the second respondent without deciding the matter as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Court in W.A. No. 1354 of 2006, dated 04.01.2007, as illegal, and to consequently grant reconfirming the sale letter dated 14.11.2005 in favour...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »