Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.
Pendala Vivekananda Babu Vs. Pendala Venkata Murali Krishna and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALD363; 2007(6)ALT210
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court ordered Notice Before Admission on 7.7.2006. Sri M. Venkata Narayana entered appearance on behalf of 1st respondent. The Counsel for petitioner was permitted to take out personal notice to the Counsel appearing for 2nd respondent in the Court below and also to 2nd respondent and file proof of service. On 14.6.2007 a Memo had been filed stating that immediately notice was taken and the 2nd respondent received the same on 17.7.2006 and acknowledgement also had been enclosed.2. At the request of the Counsel on record, the civil revision petition itself is being disposed of finally at the stage of admission.3. Sri M. Ravindranath Redely, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner had taken this Court through the facts of the case and also observations recorded by the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kavali at paragraphs 7 and 8 and would contend that having observed that the Court Amin exceeded his powers, instead of rectifying the same di...
V. Bikshapathi Vs. Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Bhongir ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALD681
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner functioned as a clerk in Chinnaravulapally Multipurpose Co-operative Society, Bibinagar Mandal, Nalgonda District (for short 'the Society'), upto 24.6.2007. An inspection was caused, under Section 52 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short 'the Act'), by the Inspecting Officer, into the affairs of the society. A report, dated 31.10.1989, was submitted after the inspection. Based on the report, surcharge proceedings, under Section 60 of the Act, were initiated against the petitioner. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Bhongir, the 1st respondent herein, passed order dated 6.7.1992, requiring the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 6,375/-, with interest at 18%.2. On a representation made by the petitioner, the 1st respondent reviewed his order, through proceedings dated 8.4.1993 and took the view that the petitioner is liable to pay only a sum of Rs. 100/-. Thereafter, the matter was reopened and another order, dat...
Subramanya Kumar Y.V. Vs. Southern Power Distribution Co. of A.P. and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALT147; (2008)ILLJ470AP
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. Whether the doctrine of equality enshrined in Article 14 can be invoked by the High Court for issue of a mandamus to the State or its instrumentalities/agencies or any public authority to pass an illegal order or commit an illegality on the premise that in a similar case, such an illegal order has been passed or illegality has been committed by the State etc. is the question which arises for determination in this appeal filed by Shri Y.V. Subramanya Kumar against order dated January 2, 2007 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 24158/2007.2. The appellant worked as a labour under various contractors, who were awarded different works by the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board (for short, 'the Board'). In the year 1997, he along with some others filed Writ Petition No. 23578/1997 for issue of a mandamus to the Board to absorb them in the regular establishment in accordance with the policy contained in B.P. Ms. No. 36, dated May 18, 1997...
Bussa Chandrakala Vs. Bussa Konda Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALD804
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri K. Mahipathy Rao, learned Counsel representing the appellant -4th defendant and Sri Sourab representing Sri A. Narasimha Reddy, learned Counsel representing the contesting respondents.2. This Court on 9.10.1998 made the following order:In view of the substantial questions of law raised in ground No. 15, this second appeal is admitted.3. The grounds specified as A to F in ground No. 15 of the Memorandum of Second Appeal read as hereunder:(A) Whether the sale effected by the respondent No. 2 under Ex.A2 is hit by the provisions of compromise decree in OS No. 46 of 1980?(B) Whether the respondent No. 2 was entitled to sell the suit land to discharge his debts as directed in Ex.B4 and being his legal necessity?(C) Whether the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 can question the sale Ex.A2 without paying the debts legally due by the father, the respondent No. 2?(D) Whether the lower appellate Court was justified in giving findings without discussing the oral and documen...
Vardhineedi Sree Devi Vs. Chegondi Ramalakshmi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALD720
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. First respondent and the revision petitioner contested an election to the post of MPTC of Doddipatla village of Elamanchili Mandal, for which the election took place on 02.07.2006 and counting was held on 04.07.2006. The results were declared on the same day and the revision petitioner was declared elected. Questioning the election of the revision petitioner, first respondent filed election petition with a delay of 47 days and filed a petition under Section 5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay in filing the election petition. In spite of opposition by the revision petitioner, the election Tribunal by order under revision directed the parties to adduce evidence with regard to the question whether the delay can be condoned or not. Questioning the same, the revision petitioner, who is the successful candidate in the election, filed the revision petition.2. The main contention of the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner is that inasmuch as the A.P. Pan...
P. Mohan Vs. Special Court Under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALD280; 2008(1)ALT506
T. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. Since all the three review WPMPs. emanate from a common order of this Court dated 9-8-2006 in WP Nos. 16223, 19927 and 20375 of 1999, they can be disposed of together.2. The review petitioner is the first respondent in WP Nos. 16223 and 20375 of 1999 and petitioner in WP No. 19927 of 1999. The second respondent in Review WPMP No. 3811 of 2007 along with others filed the Writ Petition No. 16223 of 1999 and the other petitioners filed WP No. 20375 of 1999 seeking to assail the common order dated 19-6-1997 passed by the learned Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act in LGC No. 146 of 1994 and LGC No. 2 of 1995. After having heard either side, eventually this Court under the order now sought to be reviewed, allowed Writ Petition Nos. 16223 and 20375 of 1999 while dismissing the Writ Petition No. 19927 of 1999. As aforesaid, one of the respondents in the writ petitions is now seeking to review the said order.3. The review is sought for mainly on ...
Kandipalli Madhavarao Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4555
ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.2. This revision is filed against the conviction and sentence of the petitioner/accused of the offence under Section 477-A IPC. The petitioner was tried by the trial Court for the offences under Sections 408, 420, 468, 471 and 477-A IPC. The trial Court while acquitting him of the offence under Section 408 IPC, convicted him of the offences under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 477-A IPC and passed different sentences. In appeal by the petitioner, the appellate Court acquitted him of the offences under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC, but confirmed the conviction for the offence under Section 477-A IPC passed by the trial Court sentencing the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.3. The facts, which gave rise to this prosecution, were that...
Fishermen Co-operative Society, Nutchupoda Pamuru Mandal Vs. Commissio ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)ALD457
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J. 1. These two writ petitions are filed, challenging the proceedings, dated 11.4.2007, through which the Commissioner of Fisheries/Ex-officio Registrar of Cooperative Societies, the 1st respondent herein, appointed an official person-in-charge, to look after the affairs of Fishermen Cooperative Society, Nutchupoda (for short 'the society'). While W.P. No. 7730 of 2007 is filed by the society, W.P. No. 8559 of 2007 is filed by the Vice-Chairman and Secretary. The respondents are common to both the writ petitions.2. The term of the Managing Committee of the Society was to expire on 30.3.2007. It is stated that the outgoing committee conducted elections on 6.3.2007, and a new committee, comprising of a President and 8 Directors was elected. It is also alleged that the committee so elected, has assumed charge on 9.3.2007. These developments are said to have been informed to the Assistant Director of Fisheries, Ongole, and to other authorities, through the District...
Challa Chinababu and anr. Vs. Kovila China Suryanarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD78; 2008(1)ALT515
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The second appeal was admitted on substantial questions of law raised in grounds 1 to 9 by order dated 9.10.1998. However, the learned Counsel representing appellants had pointed out to ground No. 6 in particular, which reads as hereunder:Whether the Courts below are right and justified in holding the suit to be maintainable when Section 53-A of the T.P. Act can be used as a shield but not as a sword?2. The learned Counsel also placed strong reliance on the decision of this Court in Mohd, Jahangir v. Mallikharjuna Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. Rep. by its Secretary G. Sambasiva Rao : 1991(1)ALT575 , and also the decision of the Apex Court in Patel Natvarlal Rupji v. Shri Kondh Group Kheti Vishayak Mandli and Anr. 1996 (3) CLJ 510 (SC). Incidentally, the Counsel also pointed out to certain factual controversies and would maintain that in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below being unsustainable, ...
Fishermen Co-operative Society and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Fisheries, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-2007
Reported in: 2009(4)ALT721
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two writ petitions are filed, challenging the proceedings, dated 11.4.2007, through which the Commissioner of Fisheries/Ex-officio Registrar of Cooperative Societies, the 1st respondent herein, appointed an official person-in-charge, to look after the affairs of Fishermen Co-operative Society, Nutchupoda (for short 'the society'). While W.P. No. 7730 of 2007 is filed by the society, W.P. No. 8559 of 2007 is filed by the Vice-Chairman and Secretary. The respondents are common to both the writ petitions.2. The term of the Managing Committee of the society was to expire on 30.3.2007. It is stated that the outgoing committee conducted elections on 6.3.2007, and a new committee, comprising of a President and 8 Directors was elected. It is also alleged that the committee so elected, has assumed charge on 9.3.2007. These developments are said to have been informed to the Assistant Director of Fisheries, Ongole, and to other authorities, through the District...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »