Andhra Pradesh Court December 2007 Judgments
Yerabati Ravinder Vs. Vaddiraju Rambai and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD783
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant in this second appeal. He filed OS No. 151 of 1997 in the Court of the I-Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal seeking partition of the suit schedule properties and for allotment of l/6th share. The suit was dismissed by judgment dated 18.1.2005. The appeal preferred by the plaintiff being AS No. 18 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the IV-Additional District Judge, Warangal was also dismissed by judgment dated 4.12.2006. Hence, this second appeal.2. The facts, in brief, are as under:The plaintiff and the defendants are the children of late Yerabati Venkata Ranga Rao and Lakshmi Narsu Bai. During her lifetime Smt. Lakshmi Narsu Bai purchased the suit land, measuring 300 Sq. yards, situated in Nakkalagutta, Hanamkonda along with a small tiled house. She died intestate on 3.9.1966 and her husband died in the year 1970. Thereafter, the plaintiff demanded for partition of suit schedule property and to give him his l/6th share. However...
Tag this Judgment!Burra Soundarya Vs. Thoutam Rama Devi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD308; 2008(2)ALT284
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Elections to the Gram Panchayat of Bhupalpally were held on 29.7.2006. The 1st respondent; the petitioner, and respondents 5 to 10 contested the election. The petitioner was declared elected. The 1st respondent filed O.P. No. 8 of 2006 in the Election Tribunal-cum-Junior Civil Judge, Parkal, challenging the election of the petitioner. It was pleaded inter alia that the husband of the petitioner functioned as Sarpanch in the previous term, and using his influence, he got about 400 invalid votes counted in favour of the petitioner. In the paragraph relating to cause of action, the date of election was mentioned as 28.7.2006.2. The petitioner filed I.A. No. 29 of 2007, with a prayer to reject the O.P., on the ground that it lacked necessary particulars, as contemplated under Rule 3(i)(ii) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj (Election Tribunals in respect of Gram Panchayats, Mandal Parishads and Zilla Parishads) Rules, 1995 (for short 'the Rules'). The 1st respondent fi...
Tag this Judgment!Madishetti Shekar and anr. Vs. Puliyala Komurelli
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2007
Reported in: AIR2008AP131; 2008(2)ALD265; 2008(2)ALT338; IV(2008)BC389; 2008(2)CTLJ251(AP)
G. Rohini, J.1. The defendants are the appellants in this second appeal. The plaintiff (respondent herein) filed O.S. No. 159 of 2002 in the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,72,000/- allegedly due from the defendants and the same was decreed by judgment dated 24.1.2006. The appeal preferred by the defendants, being A.S. No. 51 of 2006 on the file of the TV Additional District Judge, Warangal, was dismissed by judgment dated 8.2.2007. Hence, this second appeal.2. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is as follows:The plaintiff advanced a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- to the 1st defendant during May 1977 without executing any document. The 1st defendant postponed the repayment of the said amount for a long time and ultimately on the intervention of the elders and well-wishers, the 1st defendant executed an agreement dated 10.12.2000 agreeing to repay the amount due within six months; in default, he would handover his house bearing No. 1-9-559 to...
Tag this Judgment!Future Builders Co-operative Housing Society Vs. S. Malla Reddy and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD231; 2008(2)ALT520
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Since common questions of fact and law arise in these three revisions, they are being disposed of by a common order. For the sake of convenience, parties to these petitions would hereinafter be referred to as they are arrayed in the plaint.2. Plaintiff, who is the revision petitioner in all these revisions, filed the suit against defendants, who are the respondents in all these revisions, for a declaration that it is the owner of the plaint schedule property and for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with its possession thereon, inter alia alleging that it is a Society founded by promoters including the first defendant and is registered under the Cooperative Societies Act and one of its objects is to acquire or purchase land for the benefit of its members and render it fit for habitation. Before its registration, its promoter having identified the plaint schedule land as fit for its purpose negotiated with Mohd.Sarvar, its erst...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi), Rep. by Its General Manager, South Central Railw ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2007
Reported in: 2008(4)ALD169; 2008(2)ALT1
ORDERB. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 22-10-2007 passed in E.P. No. 20 of 2005 on the file of III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Chief Judge overruled the objections of the judgment-debtors and ordered further step with regard to sale of E.P. schedule property.2. Background facts in a nutshell leading to filing of this civil revision petition by the judgment-debtors in E.P. No. 20 of 2005 are: This is second journey to the High Court by the judgment-debtors. The respondent/decree-holder entered into an agreement with the Indian Railways for laying Pedddapalli - Karimnagar new railway line. Certain disputes arose in respect of executing the work. Therefore, the decree-holder invoked the arbitration clause and filed A.A. No. 31 of 2001 seeking appointment of arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes. Sri K. Srinivasa Murthy, Advocate, came to be appointed as a sole a...
Tag this Judgment!R. Veera Raghava Prasad and ors. Vs. District Collector and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD198; 2008(2)ALT136
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. In this batch of cases, the petitioners, besides raising issues specific to their cases, also raised the common issue, viz., whether the proceedings initiated by respondents for acquiring their agricultural lands without their conversion for non-agricultural use, viz., house sites, are invalid as being contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes) Act, 2006 (for short 'the 2006 Act'). Therefore, all these Writ Petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Before going into the individual issues raised in these Writ Petitions, I propose to decide the common issue first.3. In all these cases, the lands proposed to be acquired-are agricultural lands. They are proposed to be acquired for providing house sites to the poorer sections of the Society. In the affidavits filed in support of their respective Writ Petitions, the petitioners averred that under Section 3 of...
Tag this Judgment!Pachala Durga Prasad Vs. the State of A.P. Rep. by the Public Prosecut ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD(Cri)413; 2008(1)ALT(Cri)315
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Accused No. 1 in S.C. No. 25 of 2004, on the file of the II Additional District & Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry, was convicted for the offences under Sections 302 and 314 of IPC. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life, and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year, for the offence under Section 302 IPC. Sentence of imprisonment for life, for the offence under Section 314 of IPC, was also imposed, and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. A-2, the father of A-1, and A-3, the sister of A-1, were tried for offences under Sections 302, 314, read with 114 and 498-A of IPC and under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. However, they were acquitted of the said offences. While the appellant (A-1) filed Crl. A.No. 802 of 2005, assailing the conviction and sentence awarded to him, the State filed Crl. A. No. 1057 of 2007, against the acquittal of A-2 and A-3.2. Briefly stated, the ca...
Tag this Judgment!Chinnamsetty Murali Krishna Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD549; 2008(2)ALT120
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the petitioner's revision in his Ref. No. E3/2594/2007, dated 06-08-2007, as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, and contrary to proviso to Section 9 and 8(2) of A.P. Records of Rights in Land Act, 1971 (for brevity, 'the Act') and consequently set aside the order of the 1st respondent passed in his Ref. No. E3/2594/2007, dated 06-08-2007, with further direction to entertain the revision of the petitioner as per Section 9 of the Act.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he has purchased an extent of Ac.4.28 cents of the agricultural land in Sy. No. 608 of Pedapalli village, Sidhout mandal, Kadapa District in public auction conducted on behalf of the District Co-operative Central Bank Limited., Kadapa for Rs. 90,000/- and the sale was confirmed ...
Tag this Judgment!B.S.V.S.P. Choudary, President, All India Credit Card Association Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-2007
Reported in: AIR2008AP147; 2008(2)ALD475; 2008(2)ALT106; IV(2008)BC418
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy J.1. The telegram dated 16.3.2007 sent by one Sri B.V.S.P. Choudary, claiming himself to be the president of All India Credit Card Members Association, A.P. Unit, Hydrabad to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this Court complaining that the recovery gundas/representatives of HDFC Bank have illegally detained Prof. C.L.N. Murthy, Scientist, IICT, Uppal, Hyderabad and that the Station House Officers cf Mahankali Police Station and Chikkadapalli Police Station have illegally acted in that regard, was taken up as Writ Petition.2. The petitioner has sent two telegrams on 16.3.2007. The contents of the telegrams are that the petitioner has received a phone call from Prof. C.L.N. Murthy, Scientist at IICT Uppal stating that some recovery gundas/representatives of HDFC Bank followed him from his residence and forcibly kidnapped him and to rescue him, that recovery gundas had brought C.L.N. Murthy to Mahankali Police Station, that on his (petitioner) telephoning to the police...
Tag this Judgment!Gajbinkar Arjun and anr. Vs. Siddipet Municipality Rep. by Its Commiss ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD632; 2008(2)ALT468
ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in seeking to take steps to raise commercial complex on the land admeasuring Ac.00.29 guntas and 40 square yards comprised in Sy.No.1825 of Siddipet Town, Medak District, without acquiring the same under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') and paying compensation to the petitioners, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 300A of the Constitution of India. The petitioners also sought for grant of consequential benefits.2. Briefly stated, the facts are as follows:An extent of Ac.00.29 guntas 40 square yards in Sy.No.1825 of Siddipet Town has been in possession of respondent No. 1 -Municipality (for short, 'the Municipality'). The petitioners claim to have entered into an agreement of sale with Sri Gattupalli Bhadraiah and Sri Gattupalli Shankaraiah, who are the sons of Gattupalli Nagamallaiah, the original owner of the lan...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »