Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Parepally Satyanarayana Vs. Vutukuri Meeneder Goud and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD461; 2008(1)ALT660
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Revision Petition is filed by the first defendant against the order, dated 29-07-2004 in I.A.No.1097 of 2004 in O.S.No.302 of 2004 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Nalgonda, regarding the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 of C.P.C. 2. The plaintiff filed the suit for perpetual injunction restraining the first defendant from evicting him from the suit premises otherwise than in due course of law and for mandatory injunction directing the second defendant to break open the lock put to the suit premises. After ordering urgent notice in I.A.No.1090 of 2004 for the same relief, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.1097 of 2004 under Order 26 Rule 9 of C.P.C. for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to break open the locks of the suit premises to record the physical features of the said premises and to ascertain facts of the possession of the suit schedule property. The lower Court passed the following order:Heard. In view of the c...
Tapal Timmappa and Sons a Partnership Firm Mineral Dealers Rep. by Its ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALD517; 2007(6)ALT259
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. One Tapal Thimmappa was granted a mining lease for Iron ore over an area of 231 acres in Sy. Nos. 1 and 2 of Malapanagudi Village, D. Hirehal Mandal, Ananthapur District on 16-8-1955 for a period of 20 years which expired on 15-5-1977.2. Thereafter, on 12-7-2004 a notification was published under Rule 59 (1) (a) & (ii) of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (for short, 'the Rules') declaring that the said 231 acres of land situated in Sy.Nos. 1 & 2 of Malapanagudi Village was available for regrant of a mining lease after expiry of 30 days from the date of publication of the notification. In pursuance thereof, M/s. Obulapuram Mining Company (P) Limited (9th respondent in W.P.Nos.14116 & 14818 of 2007) applied for grant of mining lease on 28-8-2004 over an extent of 93.52 hectares (231 acres). The petitioner in W.P.Nos.9723 & 14818 of 2007 - M/s. Tapal Thimmappa and Sons, a Partnership Firm made an application on 15-1-2005 for grant of mining lease over an area of 40.47 h...
Nalisetty Srinivasulu Vs. Nalisetty Sunandha
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALT6; II(2008)DMC250
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Revision is coming up for Admission.2. This Court ordered Notice before admission on 12-6-2007 and permitted the Counsel for petitioner to take out notice to the respondent and file proof of service. Sri M. Venkata Narayana, entered appearance representing the respondent.3. Smt. N. Suguna, the learned Counsel representing the Revision Petitioner would maintain that the quantum of interim maintenance and the quantum of legal expenses which had been granted by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur are on higher side and totally disproportionate to the income since the Revision Petitioner/husband is only an agricultural coolie and that too the-parties are residents of Atmakur village. The. Counsel also pointed out that the affidavit filed in support of the application by the respondent/wife also does not disclose the '; details of the assets, if any, of the Revision Petitioner/husband. The learned Counsel also would submit that due to unavoidable reasons, th...
K.R. Krishna Goud Vs. Prohibition and Excise Superintendent
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD76; 2008(3)ALT730
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Excise appearing for the respondent.2. Petitioner-President of the Toddy Tappers Co-operative Society, Koheer Village and Mandal, Medak District questions the order of the respondent, dated 10.1.2007, in Cr. No.B3/75/2006 cancelling the licences of the toddy shop TCS Group Koheer bearing Nos. 21, 22 dated 19.4.2002, and Toddy Depot licence No. 2, dated 19.4.2002, granted in favour of the petitioner for the rest of the period upto 31.3.2007.3. It is stated that the said licences have been granted for the sale of toddy upto 31.3.2007 and as per the orders of the Government in Memo No. 14139/ Ex.II(1)2007-1, dated 29.3.2007, Government permitted the Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, Hyderabad to extend licence to the toddy shops which expires by 31.3.2007. It is the case of the petitioner that the Special Task Force raided the house of one C. Narasimha Reddy of Kohe...
Abbireddi Sarojini and Four ors. Vs. Batchu China Kamalam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD56
P.S. Narayana, J.1. On 25.1.1999 this Court made the following order:In spite of service of notices, none appeared for the respondents.In view of the judgment of this Court in Alapati Venkata Rao v. Nizampatnam Satyanarayana 1988(2) APLJ 209 and in view of the substantial questions of law raised in ground No. 6, the Second Appeal is admitted.2. The substantial questions of law raised in (a) and (b) of ground No. 6 read as hereunder:(a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Courts below are right inferring that defendants are committing NUISANCE especially when the defendants and prior to them, their predecessor, has been carrying on the same business for the past several years and no one in that area had ever raised any objection to the activities of the defendants except the plaintiff alone and when plaintiff failed to establish that the activities of the defendants are causing unreasonable interference.(b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the...
Raja Oil and Flour Mill, Represented by Chinta Raju Vs. Canara Bank, R ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALD801
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Suresh Kumar representing Sri A.Rajasekhar Reddy, learned Counsel for appellant and Sri V.S.Valluru, learned Counsel representing the respondent.2. Sri Suresh Kumar learned Counsel representing the appellant had pointed out to the substantial questions of law raised in grounds 15(a) and 15(b), on the strength of which the Second Appeal was admitted and would maintain that the terms and conditions relied upon by the appellate Court while modifying the decree and judgment of the trial Court and granting interest also relate to the cheques, orders and the like but not a case of this nature. The counsel also incidentally pointed out to the respective pleadings of the parties, the evidence available on record and the findings recorded by the Court of first instance and also the appellate Court and would maintain that inasmuch as the bona fide mistake was there both on the part of the Bank and also the customer, charging of interest in such a case definitely can...
Regional Manager, Apsrtc and ors. Vs. Mohd. TajuddIn and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALD597
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. Heard Sri V.T.M. Prasad for the petitioners and Sri C. Raghu representing Mr. C. Nageswara Rao, learned Counsel for the respondent-workman.2. This writ petition by the A.P. State Road Transport Corporation is directed against the Award of the Labour Court-II, Hyderabad, dated 3.2.1997 in I.D. No. 23 of 1995.3. The 1st respondent workman was a driver employed with the petitioner-Corporation. While the 1st respondent was driving the bus of the Corporation on 26.1.1985 at about 3.00 p.m., an accident occurred. One individual died as a consequence, and a few were injured. The petitioner was prosecuted for rash and negligent driving under Section 304A of I.P.C., but was acquitted of the charge on the ground that the evidence on record did not establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt. The legal representatives of the deceased filed an application for compensation before the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, Warangal, which is stated to have been allowed i...
Green Dot Agencies and ors. Vs. Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Socie ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD130; 2007(6)ALT423
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Re vision Petition is filed by the defendants in Certificate No. 46/03/G, dated 31 -03-2004 on the file of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Golconda Division, Hyderabad, contending that the Certificate issued under Section 71(1) of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, (for short 'the Act') to the Applicant Bank, without conducting any enquiry and without service of summons and without giving any opportunity to the petitioners is not valid under law and is liable to be cancelled.2. For recovery of debts, the procedure was prescribed under Section 71(1) of the Act, which reads as follows:71. Recovery of debts:(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force and without prejudice to any other mode of recovery which is being taken or may be taken the Registrar may on the application made by a society or financing bank or federal society as the case may be, for the recovery of arrears of any sum advan...
Gurram Narsireddy Vs. Transmission Corporation of A.P. Limited (A.P. T ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALT506
ORDERG.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing notice dated 15-12-2004 issued by Prescribed Authority under Section 6 of the Andhra Rradesh State Electricity Board (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1984 (for short 'the 1984 Act').2. The petitioner claims to have purchased a small rice mill from Shri T. Ramulu of Juglakpalli Village, Pochampalli Mandal, Nalgonda District in 1985 and shifted the same to Dhothigudem Village, which is the hamlet of Juglakpalli Gram Panchayat, along with L.T. Service Connection bearing No. 336. He operated the mill for about 12 years and then discontinued the manufacturing activity. The supply of power to the mill is also said to have been disconnected on 3-2-1998. After six years, the petitioner received letter dated 19-2-2004 issued by Additional Assistant Engineer, Electrical Operation, Bhudan Pochampally addressed to his father Shri G. Chandra Reddy for payment of Rs. 1,67,559/- against connection bearing No. 336 with a threat ...
Shaik Mohammed Vs. M.A. Hameed and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD584
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard the Counsel on record.2. Sri P.S. Murthy and Sri Ashok Kumar Avasthi made submissions at length pointing out the substantial questions of law, on the strength of which the second appeal had been admitted.3. The principal question, which had been argued in elaboration, is that the appellate Court is totally unjustified in granting the relief to the opposite party even while dismissing the appeal and the same is without jurisdiction.4. This Court on 29.1.1999 made the following order:Following are the substantial questions of law which arise for consideration in this second appeal:(1) Whether the judgment of the lower Court is perverse and whether the finding of the lower appellate Court that the suit land is not of 20 feet width and 60 feet length, is based on no evidence?(2) Whether the lower appellate Court committed illegality in giving substantive relief to the defendants while dismissing the appeal filed by them?The second appeal is therefore admitted.5. F...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »