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.
imandi Anasuya Vs. Bandaru Satyanarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD575; 2008(1)ALT211
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner in A.T.C. No. 38 of 1993 on the file of the Special Officer under Andhra Pradesh Tenancy Act-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District.2. The tenant filed A.T.C. under Section 16 of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') for a declaration that the petitioner is a statutory tenant in the schedule land and for consequential injunction restraining the respondents and their men from ever interfering with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the schedule land till he is duly evicted under the process of law.3. The Special Officer, after considering the evidence adduced by both parties, dismissed the petition. Being aggrieved by the same, the tenant preferred A.T.A. No. 7 of 2004 before the appellate Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, West Godavari at Eluru. The appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal by setting aside the order of ...
Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD812; 2008(6)ALT64
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. The writ petitioner is a Public Limited Company involved in production of Bulk Ferroy Alloy, for which purpose it requires large quantities of Manganese Ore.2. Pursuant to the notification dated 25.1.2000 issued by the 2nd respondent under Rule 59(l)(a) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (for short, 'the Rules') notifying the area to an extent of 8.23 cents situated in Sy. Nos. 71, 78, 79, 91/6, 81/2 to 6 of Kondapalem Village for grant of mining lease (Manganese Ore), the petitioner-Company made an application on 16.6.2000. For the very same area, the 4th respondent herein also made an application on 27.5.2000. Having processed the applications received, the 2nd respondent vide memo dated 12.10.2001, while informing the petitioner that it's application was proposed for rejection on the ground that the area applied was fully overlapping with the applied area of the prior applicant i.e., 4th respondent called upon the petitioner to show-cause as to why its applic...
Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Rep. by Its Commissioner Vs. Philom ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-15-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD1; 2008(1)ALT670
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. Rapid urbanisation has necessitated regulations being made, and restrictions being imposed, in public interest on the common law rights of individuals to construct buildings of their choice, Shiv Kumar Chadha v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi : [1993]3SCR522 , to ensure systematic, orderly and methodical development of cities, (3 ACES, a partnership firm rep., by its partner Sri Bishanlal Ahuja, Hyderabad v. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, rep., by its Commissioner, Hyderabad : AIR1995AP17 .2. Inability of municipal authorities to stop illegal constructions has resulted in ever increasing violation of building plans and byelaws, the wrongdoers emboldened by the fact that the law will not catch up with them. Supreme Court Monitoring Committee v. Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority : (2003)10SCC445 Such illegal activities of raising unauthorized constructions must be firmly dealt with as it is against public interest. Pratibha Cooperative Housing So...
Veppalem Batti Gopal Rao (Died) and ors. Vs. Yerragudi Subramanyam Var ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD713
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri L.J. Veera Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the appellants and Sri M.P. Chandramouli, the learned Counsel representing the respondent.2. Sri L.J. Veera Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the appellants had taken this Court through the substantial questions of law on the strength of which the second appeal was admitted and would maintain that even if the findings of the Court of first instance and also the Appellate Court are to be taken into consideration, the tenancy not being in serious controversy unless and until the appellants are evicted by due process of law, the possession cannot be disturbed. The learned Counsel also would maintain that when specific stand had been taken by the appellants relating to the execution of the agreement of sale by the wife of the plaintiff, the non-examination of the wife is a serious lapse and adverse inference should have been drawn in this regard, and hence, the findings recorded cannot be sustained and t...
N. Santha Kumari Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by Its Secretar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD110; 2008(1)ALT330
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This court issued Rule Nisi on 23-09-2005, but was not inclined to grant any interim order. W.P.M.P. No. 27963/2007 is filed praying for the relief to receive the copy of the notification in Rc. No. 1105/2007 7G: dated 27-09-2007 issued by the fourth respondent and for other reliefs. Likewise, W.P.M.P. No. 27964/2007 is filed praying for the relief directing the respondents not to fill up the vacancy of Fair Price Shop dealer at Kubadpuram village, Rajupalem Mandal, Guntur District pending disposal of the main writ petition.2. Since a counter affidavit had been filed by R2 at the request of the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner and also the learned Asst. Government Pleader for civil supplies, the writ petition itself is being disposed of finally.3. Since Sri V.V.L.N. Sarma, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner had taken this Court through the series of events and also the nature of the orders, which were made and would maintain that f...
Lakkireddy Narasimha Reddy Vs. Lakkireddy Yella Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD142
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The respondent herein filed O.S. No. 36 of 1999 in the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Siricilla against the appellant, for the relief of perpetual injunction as regards the use of a passage, marked in the sketch, appended to the plaint. He pleaded that the passage in question is the only access for him to reach the Gram Panchayat road, for the last several decades. Apart from the right on account of the prolonged usage, he also claimed right to the extent of one-fourth share vis-a-vis the passage on account of purchase of an item of property from one Smt. Lakkireddi Rajawa, a close relation of the appellant. He complained that the appellant is obstructing the use of passage, without any basis.2. The appellant filed a written statement denying the claim of the respondent. He pleaded that the respondent had an independent access and he does not have any right whatsoever to use the passage in question. Objection was also raised as to the maintainability of the s...
Muslareddygaru Subbamma and ors. Vs. Mulla Ismail and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD61; 2008(3)ALT532
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Both the second appeals are between the same parties and as regards the same property. They arise out of O.S. Nos. 10 of 1984 and 33 of 1988 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nandyal. The appellants are the legal representatives of one Mr. Bhogi Reddy. He was the sole defendant in the 1st suit and sole plaintiff in the second suit.2. Respondents 1 and 2 are the grandsons of one late Jaffer Saheb. He was the absolute owner and possessor of an extent of about Acs.2.80 cents of land in Survey No. 180 of Kanala Village. The respondents filed O.S. No. 10 of 1984 in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Nandyal, against Mr. Bhogi Reddy, for the relief of declaration of title and perpetual injunction as regards the said land. It was pleaded that, Mr. Jaffer Saheb, had executed two gift deeds on 16.3.1981 in their favour, donating the suit schedule property and delivered possession to them. According to them, ever since the date of gift deeds, they are in possession and ...
B. Lakshman and anr. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi), Ministry of Defence ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD429; 2008(1)ALT443
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri D.V.Seetharama Murthy, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioners, Sri Deepak Bhattacharjee, the learned Counsel representing the first respondent and Sri Y.V.Ravi Prasad, the learned Counsel representing the second respondent. 2. This Court issued Rule Nisi on 05.01.2007. In W.P.M.P. No. 69 of 2007, this Court made the following order:The petitioners who are the elected members of the Cantonment Board, Secunderabad filed the main writ petition aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not permitting them to function as members of the Cantonment Board.It is not in dispute that after the petitioners were elected vide notification dated 19.05.2006, which was notified by the Government of India under Section 16(1) of the Cantonments Act, 1924, the Cantonments Act 2006 (41 of 2006) has come into force w.e.f. 18.12.2006. By virtue of the said Act, the Cantonment Act, 1924 stood repealed. It is not in dispute that in exercise of powers confer...
Jadav BIn P. Patel (Died) by Lrs. Vs. G. Srinivas Reddy (Died) by Lrs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD209; 2008(3)ALT388
A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. This appeal is preferred by defendants 1 to 3 against the judgment and decree, dated 25.10.1995, passed by the Additional Subordinate Judge, Rangareddy District, in O.S. No. 191 of 1987, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for specific performance of agreement of sale, dated 23.4.1984, in respect of suit schedule properties.2. Pending the appeal, the first appellant died, and therefore, the fourth appellant was brought on record as his legal representative as per order, dated 14.2.2002, passed in C.M.P. No. 2406 of 2002. Similarly, on the death of first respondent/plaintiff, respondents 3 to 8 were brought on record as his legal representatives, as per the orders in A.S.M.P. No. 23 of 2006, dated 24.1.2006. For the sake of convenience the parties shall be referred to as arrayed in O.S. No. 191 of 1997.3. The facts, which are not in dispute, are briefly stated as under:Plaintiff and Mohd. Khasim Ali defendant No. 4 entered into agreement of sale-Ex. A.1 on 23.4.1984...
Obelisetty Ramanadham Vs. Obelisetty Bhaskar Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD278; 2008(2)ALT24
ORDERGopalakrishna Tamada, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 16-03-2007 passed in I.A. No. 232 of 2007 in O.S. No. 42 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the IV Additional District Judge, Warangal, whereby the Court below permitted a xerox copy of the partition list to be adduced as a secondary evidence as provided for under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for short, 'the Act').2. Brief facts are that petitioner herein, who is none other than the father of the respondents herein, instituted the suit, O.S. No. 42 of 2003, seeking partition of the plaint schedule properties into four equal shares and put him in possession of his share. In the said suit, the stand of the defendants i.e., the respondents herein is that the suit schedule property was already partitioned and that during the course of partition, a list of partition was prepared by the elders on 19-12-1996 and the original was handed over to the father i.e., the petitioner herein and xerox cop...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »