Andhra Pradesh Court October 2008 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.
Koganti Sujani Vs. Vissamsetti Sankar Babu and 3 ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ALT219
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred by the fourth defendant in O.S. No. 30 of 2002 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District.2. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that he is the absolute owner of 1/3rd share in the plaint schedule property, for perpetual injunction, mandatory injunction and other reliefs. The suit was numbered by accepting the value of the property and the Court fee was paid. Five years after the filing of the suit, the fourth defendant filed I.A. No. 278 of 2007 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying to direct the plaintiff to pay deficit Court fee on the ground that the plaintiff has admitted in an application for amendment of the plaint that the property is worth more than one crore rupees. The suit was filed in 2002 and amendment petition was filed in 2006, that is four years after filing the suit mentioning that the property covered by item No. 1 fetches more than one crore...
Yerram Krishna Rao, Vs. Muttamalla Narasamma -died Per Lr and Muttamal ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)ALT631
B. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. These two Second Appeals are listed before us on a reference being made by learned single Judge for an authoritative pronouncement on the questions formulated, which are extracted hereunder:1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, especially, the documentary evidence placed before the Court, relating to the obtaining of delivery by rent control proceedings, whether Ex.A2 = Ex.B.10 to be treated as out and out sale or a mortgage by conditional sale or an anomalous mortgage and whether the transaction would be governed by Section 58[c] or 58[g] of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?2) Whether extraneous evidence can be let in to explain the nature of transaction in the light of the clear recitals made in Ex.A1 = Ex.B.10 in the facts and circumstances of the case?2. Background facts of the case leading to filing of these two Second Appeals, in brief, are: Smt. Muttamalla Narasamma, wife of Lingaiah, was the owner of premises bearing Nos. 6-4-61 and...
Tvs Electronics Limited and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Civil Suppl ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ALT243; 2009CriLJ1470
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. M/s. TVS Electronics Limited (TVS Electronics, for brevity) and their General Manager filed instant writ petition questioning communications of respondents 4 and 5 (Inspectors of Legal Metrology, Tenali and Vijayawada respectively) informing that petitioners have committed offences under Section 39 of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act 1976 (for brevity, the Act) and Rule 23(1) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodity) Rules 1977 (hereafter, Package Rules) punishable under Section 67 and Rule 39(1) of Package Rules. By impugned communication, petitioners were also informed that alleged offence is compoundable under Section 73 of the Act. If petitioners so desire, it was advised; they may pay necessary compounding fee within fifteen (15) days. Petitioners contend that the Act and Package Rules have no application to electronic printers (inkjet/laser/DOT Matrix printers etc) manufactured and marketed by them and that impugned communication...
T. Satyanarayana Vs. Joint Registrar/District Cooperative Officer and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-24-2008
Reported in: 2009(4)ALT724
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is the President of Gundugolanukunta Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited (for short 'the Society). He challenges the order dated 16-07-2007, through which, the Joint Registrar-cum-District Co-operative Officer, West-Godavari, at Eluru, the 1st respondent, initiated enquiry under Section 51 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short 'the Act). On an earlier occasion, based on the representation submitted by the Vice-President of the Society, the 4th respondent, and certain others, the 1st respondent caused inspection under Section 52 of the Act. Simultaneously, the 1st respondent proposed to take action against the petitioner, under Section 21AA of the Act, leading to the disqualification. An order dated 05-10-2006 was passed, declaring that the petitioner ceased to be the President of the Managing Committee.2. O.A. No. 73 of 2006, filed by the petitioner, before the A.P. Co-operative Tribunal, Vijayawada, was...
G.S. Brahmaji Rao Vs. Deputy Chief Electrical Engineer, Workshop, Lalg ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALT298
ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J. 1. This writ petition is filed against the order dated 24-02-1999 passed in O.A. No. 1104 of 1997 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad.2. The applicant in the O.A. is the petitioner herein. He filed the O.A. seeking to set aside the order dated 7-10-1994 passed by the 1st respondent; the order dated 31-10-1995 passed by the 2nd respondent in review and the order dated 24-8-1996 passed by the 3rd respondent in revision, with a consequential direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits like arrears of pay, seniority etc.3. The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe (ST) Community 'Konda Kapu' and he was selected to the post of trainee skilled artisan by Proceedings No. LGD/P.561/E2, dated 17-7-1989 passed by the District Electrical Engineer. Workshops, Lallaguda, Secunderabad, against 25% direct recruitment quota under Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe crash progra...
Nune Koteswara Rao Vs. the State of A.P. Rep. by Public Prosecutor
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-21-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD(Cri)677
R. Kantha Rao, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment, dated 13.05.2003 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Ongole in S.C. No. 477 of 1996 whereby and whereunder the sole appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304(1) IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-.2. Originally the appellant was tried for the charge under Section 302 IPC and at the conclusion of the trial, he was found guilty for the offence under Section 304(1) IPC and was sentenced to punishment as mentioned above. Challenging the said order of conviction and sentence, the appellant preferred this appeal.3. Shortly stated, the facts leading to filing of the appeal, according to the prosecution are as follows:The deceased (Nune Ramanamma) is the wife of the appellant (Nune Koteswara Rao). The appellant had first wife and also two children through her. He married the deceased as second wife and su...
Giriraj Singh Vaghela and 2 ors. Vs. State of A.P. Rep. by P.P., High ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-21-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1257
K.C. Bhanu, J.1. This Criminal Appeal by the appellants-A1 to A3 is directed against the judgment, dated 17-04-2006, in Sessions Case No. 429 of 2004, on the file of the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, wherein the appellants-A1 to A3 were sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment each for causing death of D1 and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for two years each for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity 'IPC'), further sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment each for causing death of D2 and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for two years each for the offence under Section 302 IPC, further sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment each and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default, to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for two years each for the offence under Section 302 r/w 120-B IPC, further sentenced to undergo Rigorous Impriso...
T. Saritha Reddy and anr. Vs. T. Obireddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-21-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ALT481
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The matter is coming up for admission. It is stated by Sri K. Suresh Reddy that he had lodged caveat on behalf of the respondent.2. Sri M. Achutha Reddy, learned Counsel representing the petitioners had taken this Court through the order made in I.A. No. 510 of 2006 in O.S. No. 820 of 2006 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool and also the order made in C.M.A. No. 32 of 2006 on the file of the Special Judge for S.C., ST. (POA) Act-cum-VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool-cum-Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurnool, and would maintain that both the courts below erred in granting temporary injunction restraining the petitioners herein, respondents in the said application from entering upon the matrimonial home. The learned Counsel also had explained the relationship between the parties and would maintain that the first revision petitioner is none other than the daughter-in-law of the respondent and the counsel also ...
Kokkula Suresh S/O Sri Narayana Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. b ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2008
Reported in: AIR2009AP52; 2009(1)ALT607
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the order dated 4.7.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jagtial, directing to send the petitioner's wife by name Gaddam Sandhya to State Home for Girls, Nimboliadda, Chaderghat, Hyderabad as arbitrary and illegal.2. The petitioner states that he married Gaddam Sandhya, the daughter of the 3rd respondent herein, on 19.06.2008 as they liked each other. However, since the marriage was against the wishes of the 3rd respondent, he lodged a complaint in P.S. Dharmapuri on 20.06.2008 alleging that his daughter Sandhya was kidnapped by the petitioner. On the basis of the said complaint FIR No. 130 of 2008 was registered, and the petitioner and his wife Gaddam Sandhya were called by the Police for enquiry. Though Gaddam Sandhya categorically stated before the Police that she married the petitioner on her own and wanted to lead a happy married life with him and refused to go with her parents, t...
Visakhapatnam Port Trust Rep. by Its Secretary, Vs. Sanapala Govindu S ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ALT558
R. Kantha Rao, J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 14.10.2003 passed in writ petition No. 5016 of 1999.2. The respondents filed the writ petition against the appellants seeking issuance of a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the appellants in not regularizing their services as Watchman-cum-Mali and Guardener on compassionate grounds in Visakhapatnam Port Trust as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India and to declare that they are entitled to be appointed as Watchman-cum-Mali and Guardener on compassionate grounds.3. The learned single judge allowed the writ petition and issued a direction in the nature of Mandamus to the appellants to consider the case of the petitioners and to take appropriate steps to regularize the services of the petitioners on compassionate grounds and further ordered that till such time the existing arrangement shall be continued. Feeling aggrieved, the Visakhapatnam Port Trust and others, the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »