Andhra Pradesh Court November 2007 Judgments

Divisional Manager, Railway Electrification and ors. Vs. Srinivasa Eng ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(3)ALD284; 2008(2)ALT99

B. Prakash Rao, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the railway authorities, under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 seeking to assail the judgment and decree in O.S. 259 of 1994, dated 13-8-2002, on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada.2. Heard Sri R.S. Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for the appellants and Sri T. Ravikumar, learned Counsel for the respondent.The brief facts leading to this appeal are that in the suit filed under Section 26 r/w Sections 20, 22 and 47 of Arbitration Act 10 of 1940 (for short the Act), the respondent plaintiff, having regard to the disputes that arose between the parties, sought direction for filing the arbitration agreement and to appoint an arbitrator on the dispute in respect of claims with interest at 24% p.a., and refer the matter for arbitration.3. Though there have been several checkered events earlier between the parties including similar exercise of arbitral proceedings leading to passing of an award already, we refrai...

Juguna Bai and anr. Vs. Sardar Surjeet Singh and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ALT418

L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two revisions are filed, challenging the final decree dated 5-2-2007, passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, in O.S. No. 54 of 1981. C.R.P. No. 3144 of 2007 is filed by defendant No. 4, and C.R.P. No. 3914 of 2007 is filed by defendant Nos. 2 and 3, in the suit. The 1st respondent, in both the revisions, is the plaintiff. The 1st defendant died, and the plaintiff claims to be her sole legal representative. The dispute, between the parties, has a chequered career. The circumstances that gave rise to the filing of the C.R.Ps are as under:2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the suit. One Sri Sardar Santh Singh had two wives by name, Rama Bai, and Juguna Bai, i.e. defendants 1 and 2. The plaintiff was adopted son of Santh Singh and his wife Rama Bai. The 3rd defendant by name, Sathnam Kaur, is the daughter of Santh Singh, through Juguna Bai, the 2nd defendant. The plaintiff filed the suit for partition of ...

Beeraka Bharamari and anr. Vs. Joint Collector and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(2)ALD45; 2008(3)ALT261

ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. Both the petitioners question the individual orders passed against them in resuming the assigned lands in their possession as confirmed by the appellate as well as revisional authorities.2. In the case of the first petitioner, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District passed resumption orders in Rc. No. 707/2005/A, dated 2.2.2006, resuming the lands purchased by her of an extent of Ac.21-62 cents in various survey numbers situated in Buddibanda Village, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Aggrieved by the said order, she filed an appeal under Section 4-A of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam which was dismissed in Rc. No. 593/2006/A, dated 26.11.2006. Against the said order, the first petitioner filed a revision before the Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam under Section 4-B of the Act, which was also ...

Dharmala Venkata Reddy and ors. Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(3)ALD161

ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to withdraw the acquisition proceedings while declaring their inaction in this respect, as illegal and arbitrary.2. The petitioners are the owners of land admeasuring Acs.8-03 cents situated in Sy. No. 213/1 to 10 of Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam District. They applied for sanction of a layout to the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, which was added as respondent No. 5 to this writ petition as per order dated 23.10.2007 of this Court. On 9.5.2001, respondent No. 5 issued proceedings approving the Block Layout Plan (BLP No. 6 of 2001). Thereafter, notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was issued in the year 2002 (date of the notification is not available on record). Evidently, no further steps were taken to complete the acquisition proceedings.3. As the acquisition proceedings have got lapsed by operation of law with the n...

Pothapi China Penchalaiah and ors. Vs. the Government of Andhra Prades ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ALD651; 2008(2)ALT180

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri N. Vasudeva Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition.2. This Court issued Rule Nisi on 11-09-2007. Counter-affidavit and reply affidavit also had been filed. Records had been produced before this Court. The writ petitioners filed the present writ petition praying for a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to proceedings No. D/12/2007, dated 21-08-2007 of the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Telugu Ganga Project, Unit-II, Cuddapah (3rd respondent herein) and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents to consider the petitioners' applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, dated 12-08-2002, and pass award in terms of judgment in L.A.O.P. No. 890 of 1999 dated 25-02-2002 and pass such other orders. 3. The relevant portion of the said proceedings dated 21-08-2007 reads as...

Rayalaseema Concrete Sleepers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Employees State Insurance ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ALT215; [2008(116)FLR738]; (2008)IILLJ234AP

L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The appellant was awarded the contract of manufacturing of prestressed sleepers, by the Indian Railways. A unit for manufacture thereof was established in the Gunthakal Railway Yard. On 12.09.1986, the premises where the manufacturing activity, was undertaken were visited by an Inspector, and records from December 1985 to August 1986 were verified. He appears to have recommended to the appellant to get it registered for coverage under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act'). Thereupon, the appellant addressed a letter, dated 23.10.1986, with a request to register its unit and to enable it to pay the contribution. When no action was forthcoming, several reminders were issued. Ultimately, through a letter, dated 21.11.1988, the respondents informed the appellant stating that the unit need not be registered, since it is operating within the premises of Railways. Without stopping there, the appellant made a further representation and the matte...

P. Rama Devi @ Chittemma Vs. Commissioner, Civil Supplies, Govt. of A. ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ALD695; 2008(2)ALT360

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri D. Madhava Rao, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.2. This Court issued rule nisi on 20.9.2006 and granted interim stay of all further proceedings in W.P.M.P. No. 24521/ 2006. Further on 19.10.2006, in W.P. M.P. No. 27677/2006 it was observed that it is unfortunate that in spite of there being interim stay of all further proceedings, the respondents are not supplying the food grains for being distributed among the card holders and hence the respondents were directed to supply essential commodities to Fair Price Shop No. 6 which is at Nagarkurnool, Mahaboobnagar District during subsistence of the interim orders passed in W.P. M.P. No. 24521/2006 dated 20.9.2006.3. The writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring the order of the Joint Collector, Mahaboobnagar District in Case No. CS. 1/66/2006 dated 22.7.2006 as null and void and opposed to law and direct the respondents...

Mamidi Rama Krishna Prasad (Died) by Lrs. Vs. Uppuluri Satyavathi

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ALD807; 2008(2)ALT590

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This revision is filed against the order, dated 21.8.2006, passed in LA. No. 1588 of 2005 in O.S. No. 596 of 1988, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam. The facts that gave rise to the filing of the revision, stated in brief, are as under:2. The deceased-1st petitioner filed the suit, against the respondent, for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale. The suit was decreed on 16.11.1998. The respondent filed A.S. No. 358 of 1999, before this Court. The appeal was allowed on 21.11.2001, and the matter was remanded to the trial Court, for fresh disposal. It was also observed that the person, who is said to have purchased the property during the pendency of the proceedings, must be impleaded as defendant.3. The petitioners state that though the appeal was disposed of by this Court, in the year 2001 itself, nothing was forthcoming for years together, and having waited sufficiently, they filed an application, bein...

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kotapati Sambasiva Rao and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Mrs. M. Shreesha, Incharge President: Oral: 1. Aggrieved by the orders of the District Forum, Guntur in C.D. Nos. 89/2007 to 262/2007, 540/2006 to 573/2006, 793/2006 to 808/2006 opposite party No. 2 i.e. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., preferred these appeals and aggrieved by the orders in C.D. Nos. 89/2007, 118/2007, 147/2007, 164/2007, 180/2007, 560/2006, 794/2006, 806/2006, 805/2006 and 803/2006, the complainants preferred F.A. Nos. 1581/2007 to 1590/2007. 2. These appeals are disposed of by a common order since the facts are similar in all these appeals. 3. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainants are agriculturists, who have deposited their stocks of chilis with first opposite party, cold storage for safe custody. The first opposite party is Himabindu Cold Storage represented by its Managing Director, second opposite party is the Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited. The first opposite party to safeguard the interest of the complainants, ins...

Shaik Mahaboob Sahab Vs. K. Nageswara Rao

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2008AP55; 2008(2)ALD624; 2008(3)ALT144

L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S.No.92 of 1984, in the Court of District Munsif, Chintalapudi, is the appellant. He filed the suit against the respondent, for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale, dated 9.7.1981. Under the agreement, the respondent agreed to sell three different extents of land, admeasuring about Acs.9-00, for a consideration of Rs.9,000/-. On the date of agreement, a sum of Rs.3,500/- was paid as advance. Out of the balance, Rs.5,000/- was to be paid to the Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank, Chintalapudi, (for short 'the Bank'), to liquidate the loan borrowed by the respondent, and Rs.500/- was to be paid, on or before 10.10.1981. The appellant pleaded that the possession of the property was delivered under the agreement, and that he spent considerable amount, to bring it under the cultivation as well as, to put the fencing. It was also his case that ever since the date of agreement, he made number of attempts to remit the a...