Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
Koneru Vara Prasada Rao Vs. State of A.P. Rep. by Sub-divisional Polic ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ2898
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. Both the cases are filed by the accused in C.F.R. No. 1452 of 2006 in S.C. No. 13/S/2005 on the file of the Special Judge for SC and ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act').2. As both the matters are under the same set of circumstances and filed against the same order, they are being disposed of by this common order.3. After registration of the crime, the police investigated the matter and charge-sheet was filed by the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Bapatla. The cognizance of the offences was taken and the case was committed to the Sessions Court for trial according to law. While the Sessions Case was pending, the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, filed a memo on behalf of the prosecution under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. requesting to permit further investigation and to submil a report.4. In the charge-sheet, it was mentioned that A-1 is the husband of A-2. A-2 is the fostered daughter of LW-1. A-1 was the Manager of Margadarsi Chit Fund Compan...
Mandava Nirmala Vs. Vellanki Vidya Swaroop and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALD160
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Ms. Annapuma Devi, learned Counsel representing the appellant and Sri Guna Ranjan, learned Counsel representing the respondents.2. This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed as against an order of remand made in AS No. 141 of 1997 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District, dated 16-7-2002.3. Ms. Annapurna Devi, learned Counsel representing the appellant had pointed out to the relevant portions of the findings recorded by the appellate Court and would comment that the main ground on which the remand was made is that the Report of the Commissioner was not filed before the Court of first instance. The learned Counsel would point out that this is not a correct finding since on a perusal of paragraph 18 of the judgment of the Court of first instance it is clear that the Report of the Commissioner, in fact, was filed and certain findings had been recorded in relation thereto. The Counsel also would maintain that the order of remand can...
K. Janga Reddy Vs. G. Srinivas and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALD113; 2007(6)ALT383
P.S. Narayana, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter, in short, referred to as 'Code' for the purpose of convenience) as against an order dated 26-6-2006 made in I.A. No. 1220/2006 in O.S. No. 1378/2006 on the file of II-Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar. The 3rd respondent in the present civil miscellaneous appeal is the Corporation Bank, S.P. Road, Secunderabad represented by its Authorized Officer and Chief Manager.2. The appellant herein, as petitioner, filed LA. No. 1220/2006 in O.S. No. 1378/2006 as specified above under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code praying for temporary injunction restraining respondent No. 3 from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the appellant-petitioner over the plaint schedule property. Before the learned II-Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.23 were marked. The learned Judge after recordin...
Koneti Ramachandra and ors. Vs. Special Officer-cum-principal District ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALD22
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. This writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 13.4.1995 in ATA No. 1 of 1994 on the file of the Court of the Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.2. The facts, in brief, are as under:The father of the petitioners by name Koneti Narayana Swamy along with one Manikyarayappa was cultivating the lands belonging to Rani Nanjammanni, After the death of Manikyarayappa, the father of the petitioners, Narayana Swamy, continued in possession and enjoyment of the lands in question as the cultivating tenant. While so, the landlady Rani Nanjammanni died and the respondents 3 and 4 herein claiming title to the lands in question under a Will said to have been executed by Rani Nanjammanni attempted to interfere with the possession of Narayana Swamy. In the circumstances, he fried O.S. No. 100 of 1979 in the Court of District Munsif, Punganur, which was renumbered as O.S. No. 429 of 1979 on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Mandanapalle, seeking perpet...
Syed Sattar Vs. K. Kotaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ALD410; 2007(3)ALT114
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against order dated 28-12-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 22851 of 2005, whereby he quashed G.O.Ms.No. 64, Revenue (Endowments IV) Department, dated 10-1-2005 issued by the State Government under proviso to Section 80(1)(c) of the Andhra Pradesh Chartable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, 'the Act').The Facts:(1) Shri Bhramarambha Chennamalleswara Swamy Temple, Esukapalli Village, Repalle Mandal, Guntur District (hereinafter described as 'the temple') is the owner of Ac. 5-19 cts. of land comprised in Survey Nos. 58/1 and 58/2, Esukapalli Village, Repalle Mandal, Guntur District. Out of this, Ac. 4-20 cts. of land was encroached by 79 persons including the appellant.(2) In the year 1985, the trust of the temple passed resolution dated 15-5-1985 for sale of the land to the encroachers at the rate of Rs. 3,500/- per cent. The encroachers did not agree to pay the price fixed by th...
Nimma Venkateswarlu Vs. Devireddy Krishnayya @ Venkata Krishnayya
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: AIR2007AP300; 2007(4)ALD782; 2007(4)ALT154
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Revision petitioner filed the suit for recovery of money, based on a promissory note, against the respondent. At the request of parties, the case was referred to Lok Adalat. Before the Lok Adalat the parties agreed for the suit being decreed as per the plaint and the revision petitioner agreed to receive Rs. 10,000/- in full satisfaction of the decree if paid on or before 30-1 -2002. On 25-2-2002 respondent filed a petition under Section 148 CPC for extension of time alleging that he offered to pay Rs. 10,000/- to the revision petitioner on 30-1 -2002 and that the revision petitioner refused to receive the same and produced a draft dated 2-2-2002 for Rs. 10,000/-. By the order under revision the trial Court allowed the said petition. Hence this revision by the plaintiff.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner is that even assuming that the contention of the respondent that he offered to pay the money on 30-1 -2002 and that the rev...
Annapurna Co-op. Housing Society Vs. Commissioner of Land Revenue, Gov ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALD433; 2007(4)ALT538
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is a Co-operative Housing Society. It purchased an extent of 11,200 square yards of land in Survey No. 49/6 of Gajularamaram Village, Ranga Reddy District, through a sale deed, dated 03-08-1991, from its registered owner. The District Revenue Officer, Ranga Reddy, the second respondent herein, initiated proceedings under Section 166-B of the A.P. (Telanaga Area) Land revenue Act, 1317 Fasli, (for short 'the Revenue Act'), against the assignees of the land in Survey No. 49/6 of Gajularamaram Village, admeasuring about Ac.65.00, on the basis of the information furnished to him by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Qutbullapur. 13 persons, against whom the proceedings were initiated, were said to be assignees and it was alleged that they sold their lands in contravention of the conditions of assignment.2. The second respondent passed an order, dated 17-08-1996, directing cancellation of the assignments as regards Ac.65.00 of land in Survey No. 49/6. O...
Nagamallu Narayana Vs. Edavall Raji Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALD463; 2007(4)ALT448
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration in this Second Appeal:(1) Whether the Judgment and Decree passed by the Ill-Additional District Judge is vitiated for non-compliance of mandatory provisions of Order 41 Rule 31 C.P.C. for not framing the points for consideration in the Appeal?(2) Whether it is justified to dispose of the Appeal in A.S.No. 6/1995 without passing any orders in I.A. No. 1120/95 filed under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C. for receiving additional evidence?(3) Whether it is justified to the appellate Court in not drawing the presumption of correctness of entries in Ex.A-1 and Ex.A-2 as is mandated under the provisions of Record of Rights Act and to draw the presumption under Section 114 of the Evidence Act about continuity of possession?2. Sri Narayana Rao, the learned Counsel representing appellant had pointed out to the relevant portions of the findings which had been recorded by the appellate Court and would contend that the w...
Dharavath Bhojya and ors. Vs. Land Acquisition Officer/Revenue Divisio ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALD668; 2007(5)ALT361
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioners held, in all, an extent of Ac.38-09 guntas of land situated in Chinthapally Village, Miryalaguda Mandal, Nalgonda District, in different survey numbers. The same was acquired by the Government for the purpose of laying a new broad guage line between Bibinagar and Nadikudi, by invoking the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'). After completing preliminary formalities, the Land Acquisition Officer - the respondent herein, passed an award, dated 8-2-1996, fixing the market value between Rs. 3,500/- to Rs. 5,660/- per acre, depending upon the categories.2. The petitioners received the compensation under protest and made a request to the respondent to refer the matter to the civil Court, under Section 18 of the Act. The request was acceded to, and the reference made by the respondent came to be taken up as O.P. No. 12 of 1989 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Mirayalguda. Through its judgment, dated 28-4-1990, the tri...
Damalanka Gangaraju and ors. Vs. Nandipati Vijaya Lakshmi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ALD694
D. Appa Rao, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the Defendants 1, 2 and 6 against granting of a Preliminary Decree for partition in the suit filed in O.S. No. 7 of 1996, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram.2. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that she is the daughter of the 1st defendant. D2 to D5 are her sisters. Her marriage was performed on 11.5.1986. The marriage of 5th defendant was performed subsequently. The marriages of D2 and D3 were performed about 20 years ago. D2 and D4 were given substantial properties from out of the joint family properties and therefore, they were not entitled to any share. She is having 1/3rd share along with D1 and D5. During the pendency of the suit, D1 said to have executed a settlement deed dated 9.3.1996, and a registered Will dated 26.5.1993, in respect of the joint family properties. They are not valid. D6 claims that he is the adopted son of D1. It is not true. This plea was put up to deny her share. She gave a lawye...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »