Andhra Pradesh Court July 2007 Judgments

Sujatha Gupta and anr. Vs. Chairman and Managing Director, Central Pow ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2007(5)ALD612

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Smt. Nirmal Kutnari was the owner of vast extent of property in Survey Nos. 7/1, 7/2, 8/3 and 8/4 of Ramanthapur Village. In 1978, she obtained permission to construct sheds therein, from the then Grampanchayat. Latter on, she leased the sheds to three lessees, viz., M/s. Swapna Ice Factory, M/s. Sheela Ice Factory and M/s. Meena Ice Factory (for short 'the lessees'). Electric supply was obtained by the lessees themselves, being Service Connection Nos. 0702-03645, 03564 and 04205, for the premises leased out to them.2. Smt. Nirmala Kumari is said to have executed a Will, dated 8.1.1998, bequeathing the property to the petitioners, who are her daughter-in law and husband. She died on 16.4.1998. Petitioners are said to have objected to the continuance of power supply to the lessees, on account of the fact that the consumption charges, to the tune of several lakhs of rupees, remained unpaid and several conditions of lease were contravened. It is the case of t...

K. Krishna Mohana Rao Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2007(5)ALD570; 2007(6)ALT391

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions, G.O. Ms. Nos. 191 and 192, General Administration (I&PR-II;) Department, dated 22.4.2006, are challenged. The facts that gave rise to the filing of these writ petitions, are as under:2. For the sake of convenience, the respondents are referred to, as arrayed in W.P. No. 9462 of 2006.3. Telugu Film Industry took its birth in the city of Madras, and was functioning from that place, for several decades. The Government of Andhra Pradesh in its GAD Department, initiated several steps, for shifting of the Industry to Hyderabad. Several incentives were provided. A Steering Committee was constituted by the Government, through its order in G.O. Ms. No. 247, General Administration (I≺) Department, dated 16.4.1984, to examine the applications for allotment of land and for providing other facilities, in the matter of setting up of the infrastructural units of the Film Industry in the State. The Committee was headed by a Minister.4. ...

Chancellor, Dr. N.T.R. University of Health Sciences and anr. Vs. Kond ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(2)ALT40

G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. Whether the Vice-Chancellor of Dr. N.T.R. University of Health Sciences (for short, 'the University') could, in exercise of the power of supervision and control vested in him under Section 12(2) of the NTR University of Health Sciences Act, 1986 (for short, 'the Act') facilitate re-verification of the answer scripts of 1st year MBBS examination held in 2006 which, as will be seen hereinafter, ultimately turned out to be an exercise for revaluation and whether the Executive Council of the University could cancel the revised result announced on 2.2.2007 are the main questions, which arise for determination in these appeals filed by the Chancellor and the University against order dated 1.5.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 8658 of 2007 and batch.2. For deciding the above noted questions, we have culled out the facts from the pleadings of the parties and the files and records produced by Sri D.V. Nagarjuna Babu, Standing Counsel for the Unive...

Karumanchi Padmapriya and ors. Vs. Chirasani Ratnakumari and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ALD431; 2008(2)ALT188

P.S. Narayana, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 385 of 2004 had been preferred by the appellants-defendants 6 to 8 as against the order in IA No. 1325 of 2002 in OS No. 44 of 2002 and 2nd defendant preferred CMA No. 387 of 2004 as against the order in IA No. 1201 of 2003 in OS No. 44 of 2002 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tenali respectively and these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals were dismissed for default.CMAMP Nos. 1174 of 2007 and 1159 of 20072. CMAMP Nos. 1174 of 2007 and 1159 of 2007 are filed for setting aside the orders of dismissal made in the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeals and to restore the said appeals to file.3. It is stated that the respective Counsel representing these appellants were held up elsewhere and at the relevant point of time the Counsel who was entrusted with the duty to represent these matters due to miscalculation of time, the said Counsel was not present and consequently these matters were dismissed for default and the respective aff...

Amway India Enterprises, (a Private Company with Unlimited Liability), ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2007(4)ALT808

C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. Whether the business activities being carried on by the petitioners attract the provisions of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act 1978 (for short 'the Act') and whether the action of respondents 3 to 6 in interfering with the activities of the petitioners by invoking the provisions of the Act is arbitrary, are the questions which fall for consideration in these two writ petitions.The resume of facts in W.P.Nos.20470 and 20471 of 2006:2. Petitioner No.1 is a private company with unlimited liability registered under the Companies Act 1956 having its registered office at C-3, Quatab Institutional Area, New Delhi. It is the wholly owned subsidiary of Amway Corporation, United States of America and is engaged in manufacture/marketing of its various products through a network of distributors. Petitioner No.2 in W.P.No.20470 of 2006 and all the three petitioners in W.P.No.20471 of 2006 are distributors of the 1st petitioner. The 1st petitioner ap...

Nemani Rajamani and ors. Vs. Nemani Surya Kantham and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2007(6)ALD224

P.S. Narayana, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the unsuccessful plaintiffs in OS No. 93 of 1988 on the file of II Additional District Judge, East Godavari District, Rajahmandry, dated 30.8.1993, aggrieved by the decree and judgment made therein dismissing the suit for partition.2. The appellants herein, as plaintiffs in the said suit, instituted the suit for partition of the plaint schedule properties into ten equal shares and allotment of four such shares to them taking good and bad qualities into consideration and for other appropriate reliefs.3. The stand taken by the first plaintiff-first appellant is that she is the second wife of late Nemani Simhachalapathi Rao, a Registered Medical Practitioner, Rajahmandry, and plaintiffs 2 and 3 are the sons and the 4th plaintiff is the daughter of the said late Simhachalapathi Rao born through his second wife. It is the specific case of the plaintiffs that the 1st defendant, the 1st respondent in the appeal, is the first wife of the said Nem...

Katragadda Satyanarayana and ors. Vs. Palanchu Babu Rao

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ALD394; 2008(1)ALT782

P.S. Narayana, J.1. This appeal is filed by the unsuccessful plaintiffs in O.S. No. 48/86 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Gudiwada. Defendant in the said suit is respondent. Appellants-plaintiffs instituted the said suit praying for the relief of recovery of Rs. 35,062-50 ps., towards unpaid purchase money, for subsequent interest and for costs with a charge over the plaint schedule property.2. On the strength of the respective pleadings of the parties, the learned Subordinate Judge having settled the issues, recorded the evidence of P.W. 1 - the 1st plaintiff, D.W. 1-the defendant, D.W. 2 and D.W. 3 and marked Ex. A-1 to Ex. A-8 and Ex. B-1 and came to the conclusion that the plaintiffs are not entitled to the reliefs prayed for and ultimately dismissed the suit but under the circumstances without costs. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is preferred.3. Sri Mallikarjuna Rao Kondasani, the learned Counsel, had taken this Court through the evidence of P.W. 1, D.W. 1, D.W. 2 an...

National Savings and Others Vs. Mrs. C.H. Annapurna

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Mrs. M. Shreesha, Incharge President: 1. Aggrieved by the order in C.D. No. 289/2005 on the file of District Forum, Guntur, opposite parties preferred this appeal. 2. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant was National Savings Scheme Agent at Vinukonda, Guntur District and submitted that she was appointed as such by the opposite parties to collect deposits from the public on behalf of the National Savings Organization and these deposits were to be deposited in the Post Office and the opposite parties agreed to allow percentage/commission on the National Savings booked by her as remuneration for her services. The claims have to be processed by the District Savings Officer, N.S.S., Guntur attached to the Deputy Regional Director, Vijayawada and the bills were sent to second opposite party i.e., Deputy Regional Director, Machilipatnam and the final approval for this claim is subject to the approval of Regional Director, Bangalore. The complainant further subm...

S.V.K. Sreenivasa Raghavan Vs. T.T. Devasthanam Rep. by Its Executive ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2007(5)ALD832

V.V.S. Rao, J.1. The first appellant is the plaintiff. He filed the suit in O.S. No. 98 of 1977 on the file of the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirupati. He prayed for a declaration that he is not a subordinate or servant or officeholder under the sole defendant, namely, Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD, for brevity), to set aside the order of removal, dated 17.02.1977 passed by TTD and for permanent injunction restraining TTD and its subordinates from interfering with the rights of the plaintiff as Dharmakartha of Sri Manavala Mahamuni Temple (Mahamuni Temple, for brevity). He also sought for a mandatory injunction directing the TTD to permit the plaintiff to enter upon 'Vanthu' (joint right in management of Temple). TTD contested the suit. Initially, the trial Court decreed the same on 17.06.1985, against which Appeal being A.S. No. 114 of 1985 filed on the file of the Court of the District Judge, Chittoor. By Judgment, dated 08.12.1989, the same was allowed and the ...

Veeramallu Narasimha Rao Vs. Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise an ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2007(5)ALD760; 2007(5)ALT68

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is the owner of a scooter bearing No. AP-37-P-1348. On 25-05-2000, it was intercepted at 12.30 p.m. by the Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise, Akiveedu. It is stated that 44 nips of I.M.L. were found in the vehicle. Therefore, it was seized and Crime No. 37 of 2001 was registered under Section 34 of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968. Proceedings were initiated for confiscation of the vehicle. However, interim custody of the vehicle was given to the petitioner on his furnishing a bank guarantee for a sum of Rs. 17,000/-, through orders, dated 06-09-2000. The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, the second respondent herein, directed confiscation of the vehicle. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the first respondent. The appeal was rejected vide orders, dated 12-04-2002. Hence, this writ petition.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the seizure itself was under doubtful circumstances and the petitioner wa...