Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
C. Bharathi Vs. District Registrar and Collector and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD735
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Since common questions of fact and law arise in both these revisions, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. Revision petitioners in these revisions are the donees of the property under the two gift deeds dated 24.5.2004 executed by one Guthi Pedda Papaiah in respect of an immovable property covered by sheds. The property covered by the two gift deeds was valued at Rs. 6,00,000/- and Rs. 8,00,000/- respectively and those gift deeds were presented for registration. The Registering Officer, having felt that the valuation of the property covered by the two gift deeds is not the real market value, referred the case to the Collector under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (the Act) for determination of the market value of the property covered by the gift deeds and kept the registration of those documents pending, and had after issuing notice in Form - II to the donees and donor, and after inspecting the property covered by the gift deeds fixed ...
Voona Rama Rao Vs. Sri Tankala Raghunatham and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-10-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALD821; 2007(6)ALT814
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The 2nd respondent filed O.S. No. 208 of 2005 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, against the petitioner, for recovery of possession of the suit schedule property. When the suit was pending, the 2nd respondent is said to have transferred the suit schedule property in favour of the 1st respondent, through the sale deed, dated 20.12.2005. In view of this development, the 1st respondent filed I.A. No. 693 of 2006 under Rule 10 of Order I C.P.C., to add him as 2nd plaintiff in the suit. The application was opposed by the petitioner, on several grounds. Through its order, dated 01.12.2006, the trial Court allowed the I.A. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition.2. Smt. Anjana Devi, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing was placed before the trial Court, to substantiate the transfer of the suit schedule property in favour of the 1st respondent. According to her, the 2nd respondent is prohibited under Section 52 of the Transfer of Prop...
JustIn Kainikaraparayil Mathew Vs. the Regional Passport Officer
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-10-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALT19
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Smt.N.Anula, Counsel representing the writ petitioner.2. This Court issued rule nisi on 13-3-2007.3. The Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent in not making the correction of place of birth in the Passport of the petitioner is wholly illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondent to correct the place of birth as Thellakom in stead of Ezhakkaranad in Passport No. F 1867475 of the petitioner and to pass such other suitable orders.4. It is stated by the petitioner that the father of the petitioner is an employee of National Research Centre for Sorghum and as such the petitioner is residing at Hyderabad and studying B. Tech. 3rd year. He was born on 9-1-1984 at Thellakom, District Kottayam, Kerala. It is further stated that during the year 2004, the petitioner had applied for Passport to the respondent and got a Passport on 2-12-2004 bearing No. F 1867475 and the same is valid till 1-12-2014. It is a...
Sri Yarnala Leela Krishna Prasad Vs. Central Bank of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-10-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD127; III(2008)BC325; [2008]81SCL215(AP)
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The Writ Petition is coming under the caption 'Interlocutory'. However, with the consent of the Counsel on record, the matter is being disposed of finally.2. This Court ordered Notice before admission on 3-7-2006 and also made an order of status quo for a limited period. Subsequent thereto on 8-6-2007, rule nisi was issued and the interim order also was extended until further orders.3. The Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands and houses under the guise of taking recourse to Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Ordinance, 2002, in short hereinafter referred to as 'Ordinance' by declaring the action of the respondents in proceeding under the Ordinance which had been repealed as illegal, unconstitutional, arbitrary and opposed to the principles of natural justice and to pass such ot...
Reliance Infocomm Ltd. Rep. by Its Authorised Signatory and anr. Vs. S ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-2007
Reported in: [2008]142CompCas170(AP)
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. This petition is filed, under Section 433(e), read with Sections 434(1)(a) and 439(1)(b), of the Companies Act, for winding up of the respondent company. 2. The petitioner, a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 with its registered office at Jamnagar, Gujarat, is engaged in the business of providing telecommunication and internet services in India. The respondent is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 with its registered office in Ranga Reddy District of Andhra Pradesh. The authorized, issued and paid up capital of the respondent is Rs. 2.00 Crores divided into twenty lakh equity shares of Rs. 10/- each. The main objects, for which the respondent was incorporated, is to manufacture, refine and carry on the business of marketing of oils etc. According to the petitioner, the respondent is indebted to it for a sum of Rs. 10,97,574/-, that, despite its repeated requests and demands, the respondent h...
Mohanl Lal Vs. Smt. Shajjia Sultana
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALD497; 2008(1)ALT66
ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. Landlady filed an eviction petition in terms of Section 10 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 being RC No. 219 of 2001. The application was dismissed by order dt. 29.12.2003. The landlady thereafter preferred an appeal being RA No. 59 of 2004 which has been allowed by the appellate court on 7.10.2006 and the tenant has filed this revision petition. The parties shall be referred to as tenant and landlady.2. The landlady claimed that she was the owner of the petition schedule mulgi. She stated that she was minor, when the tenant had obtained the mulgi from her father and guardian Mohammad Mohiuddin by a lease deed on 1.4.1983 on a monthly rent of Rs.600/- for carrying on business of jewellary. Originally the mulgee was let out to the tenant for a period of 11 months and after expiry of the said period, the tenancy became month to month and continued on the same terms and conditions except the rate of rent which was increased graduall...
A.P. Dairy Development Co.Op. Federation Limited, Rep. by Its General ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALD502; 2008(1)ALT221; [2008(116)FLR740]
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the Award dated 25-11-1999 made in I.D.No.208 of 1989 on the file of Labour Court, Guntur.2. Petitioners are the Management. Respondent No. 2 is the workman. 3. The facts are not much in dispute.4. It appears, respondent No. 2 joined as a contingent worker on 15-5-1970 in the Accounts Section of the petitioners' factory at Vijayawada and worked upto 14-10-1971. When his services were terminated with effect from 20- 10-1971, he raised a dispute under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 (for short 'the Act') before the Labour Court, Guntur in I.D.No.208 of 1989. It was the case of the 2nd respondent that he was entrusted with the duties of Typist or Lower Division Clerk during the course of his employment with the petitioners herein. He applied for leave for 5 days from 15-10-1971 to 19-10-1971, as he was not well. When he reported for duty, after expiry of leave, on 20-10-1971, he was informed that his service...
Police Officers' Association, Adilabad Unit rep. by Its President M.A. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)ALT772
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the unilateral cancellation of Long Term Group Janata Personal Accident (JPA) policy bearing No. 050600/47/51/1364/98 issued by the respondents, in the midst of currency of the policy, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to declare that the same is enforceable under law and condition No. 6 of the said policy is not valid and enforceable and also to declare the letter dated 12-4-2002 addressed by the 2nd respondent as arbitrary and illegal.2. Petitioner is Police Officers' Association, Adilabad District Unit represented by its President-M.A. Kareem. Respondent No. 1 is the Managing Director of United India Insurance Company Limited, Chennai and the 2nd respondent is the Divisional Manager of the said company at Warangal.3. According to the petitioner, police forces of the Government of Andhra Pradesh are trained and highly motivated and vital organs for maintaining law and order with the object of meet...
S. Udaya Bhasker Reddy and ors. Vs. Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, R ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-2007
Reported in: 2007(6)ALT162
C.V. Ramulu, J.1. In these two Writ Petitions, common question of law and fact arise for consideration; therefore, they are being disposed of by this common Order.2. The only question that arises for consideration in these Writ Petitions is whether U.D. Stenographers, on their conversion to the post of Senior Assistant, are entitled to reckon their seniority in the cadre of Senior Assistant from the date of their promotion/appointment as U.D. Stenographer or from the date of conversion as Senior Assistant ?3. Petitioners are all promoted as Senior Assistants from the post of Junior Assistant directly, whereas, the unofficial respondents being U.D. Stenographers were converted as Senior Assistants after completion of 3 years of service in the cadre of U.D. Stenographer. Therefore, it is the contention of the petitioners that U.D. Stenographers, who have been converted as Senior Assistants, cannot claim seniority in the cadre of Senior Assistant from the date of their appointment/promoti...
Maddi Raja Shekar Reddy S/O. M. Sudarsan Reddy Vs. the Regional Passpo ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-2007
Reported in: (2007)148PLR156
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court on 6-2-2007 issued rule nisi.2. Heard Sri A. Chandrasekhar the learned Counsel representing the petitioner.3. The Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to enter the correct date of birth of the petitioner and to issue the passport with corrected date of birth as 10-3-1970 and to pass such other suitable orders.4. It is stated by the petitioner that the original date of birth is 10th March, 1970 and the same is reflected in all his certificates. He also stated that in the Secondary School Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, his date of birth is correctly mentioned as 10-3-1970. He also stated that he completed his Secondary School in the year 1986 and the certificate is issued by the competent authority i.e., Board of Secondary Education. He also further stated that at the time of his first application to the respondent for issuance of passport, he had submitted his Secondary School Certificate for ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »