Andhra Pradesh Court February 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.
U. Mahalakshmi W/O Late U. Kurmayya Vs. the Branch Manager, State Bank ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ALD78; 2008(4)ALT561
ORDERN. Ramamohana Rao, J.1. This writ petition has been instituted seeking a declaration that the proposed action of the respondents to recover a sum of Rs. 17,169/- from the family pension payable to the writ petitioner as illegal.2. The facts, which are not in dispute, are that the husband of the writ petitioner while working as Ammunition Repair Labourer in the Naval Armament Depot, Visakhapatnam, died on 3rd October 1984 leaving the petitioner herein-his wife as the sole surviving family member. Since, the husband of the writ petitioner had rendered considerable length of service in the Naval Armament Depot, he is entitled to be paid pension and other terminal benefits, if only he had survived up to the age of superannuation. Since, he had died even prior to attaining the age of superannuation, his widow is otherwise entitled to be paid family pension. The Central Civil Services (Pension Rules) 1972 regulate the grant of pension dealing with the family pension component. Rule-54 S...
The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, a Co ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2008
Reported in: [2008]146CompCas399(AP)
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. These two applications are filed under Section 446 of Companies Act, 1956 and Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. Company Application No. 237 of 2003 is filed by Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited (hereafter, APIIC) seeking leave of this Court to initiate proceedings and take necessary steps to resume possession of land admeasuring Acs. 60.72 situated at Duvvada, Sanivada and Talarivanipalem villages of Gajuwaka Mandal of Visakhapatnam District (hereafter, Schedule 'A' lands) from A.P.Refractories Limited. Government of Andhra Pradesh in Revenue Department filed C.A. No. 428 of 2003 praying similar relief in respect of land admeasuring Acs. 97.71 in Agnampudi, Talarivanipalem and Sanivada villages (hereafter, Schedule 'B' lands). This common order shall dispose of both the company applications.2. The fact of the matter in brief as pleaded by Government may be noticed. A.P. Refractories Limited (in liquidation) (hereafter, APRL) approa...
Bandaru Parvathi W/O. Narasimha Rao Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh Re ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD(Cri)778; 2008(2)ALT(Cri)100
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. A1 in S.C. No. 129 of 2006 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-I), Khammam, filed this appeal feeling aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, handed out to her by the trial Court. She, along with A2 were accused of committing the murder of a minor girl by name Swaroopa, none other than her daughter, on 03.12.2003, by administering poison. The trial Court acquitted A2, but convicted the appellant, of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. It imposed fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. The case presented by the prosecution to the trial Court runs thus:A1 is the daughter of P.Ws.1 and 2. P.W.3 is her brother. She was married to P.W.7 and they were blessed with two daughters, the deceased, being the elder, and another by name Divya. P.Ws.1 to 3, on the one hand, and the appellant with her minor daughters, on the other,...
Onteru Venkata Subba Reddy Vs. State of A.P. Rep. by Its Public Prosec ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(1)ALD(Cri)803; 2008(2)ALT(Cri)89; 2008CriLJ2870
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment, dated 6.2.2006, rendered by the Court of III Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTC), Nellore. A-1 to A-5 were charged with the offence of committing murder of one Onteru Vijayalakshmi, the wife of A-1, on the intervening night of 5/6.12.2001. The second charge was under Section 498-A read with Section 304-B IPC, against A-1 to A-3, A-6 and A-7. In addition to that, A-1 to A-5 were accused of committing the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC, for removing the evidence.The trial court acquitted A-2 to A-5 and A-7 of all the charges. It, however, convicted A-1, of the offences punishable under Section 302, 201 and 498-A IPC. Sentence of imprisonment for life, with fine of Rs. 500/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months); rigorous imprisonment for two years, with fine of Rs. 300/- (in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months); and rigorous imprisonment for one year, with...
T. Jyothaiah Vs. Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD222; 2008(3)ALT250
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus directing the first respondent to fill up the post of Executive Engineer which is going to fall vacant at point No. 16, strictly in accordance with Article 16(4A) of the Constitution of India and G.O. Ms. No. 5 dated 14.2.2003.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was first appointed as Assistant Executive Engineer with effect from 10.9.1982 and was promoted as Deputy Executive Engineer with effect from 26.7.1999 and his probation in the said cadre was declared on 25.7.2001. Petitioner is presently working as Deputy Executive Engineer at Sri Venkateshwara Institute of Medical Sciences (Sub-Division), Tirupati. The next promotion from the post of Deputy Executive Engineer is to the post of Executive Engineer. The cadre strength of Executive Engineers in the department of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam is 16. The rule of reservation in promotion to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is a constitutionally guaran...
J. Malla Reddy Vs. Cantonment Executive Officer, Secunderabad Cantonme ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-2008
Reported in: 2009(3)ALT814
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the inaction of the respondents in clearing the layout plan submitted by him since 12-11-1996 as arbitrary and illegal and to direct the respondents to pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the loss suffered by him on account of the fraud committed by the respondents in approving the plan submitted by the fifth respondent by showing his land as the area earmarked for the parking place of the fifth respondent-Society.2. The respondents opposed the writ petition by contending that the property in dispute is vested with the Cantonment Board and notice was issued under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 and if there is any grievance for the petitioner, he has to approach the authority concerned for adjudication of the matter and since there is a dispute regarding the ownership of the property, the writ Court is not supposed to entertain the writ and grant any relief...
Sri G. Chinna Babu, S/O. Nehemiah, Vision Ventures Ltd. Vs. the Visakh ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD722; 2008(4)ALT113; 2008(2)CTLJ337(AP)
ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. The petitioner, who was unsuccessful in the tender process for development of Ultra Modern Layout on joint venture on public private partnership basis at Dakamarri, Visakhapatnam, conducted by respondent No. 1, filed the present Writ Petition for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No. 1 in not entering into an agreement with it in respect of the said contract as illegal.2. Respondent No. 1 identified an extent of Ac.98.64 cents at Dakamarri, Bheemunipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, for conversion of the said land into house plots on layout under a public private partnership scheme. It issued 'Request for Proposal' (for short 'the RFP') to invest, develop, share and market the plots by preparing an ultra-modern layout. Out of twelve agencies which procured the bid documents, eight participated in the pre-bid meeting and at the request of some of them, the tender process was rescheduled by fixing 18-1-2008 as the date for opening ...
Pothepalli Nagabhushanam Vs. Ravipati Subba Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD599; 2008(6)ALT711
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Second Appeal No. 192 of 1999 is filed by the first defendant being aggrieved by the reversing decree and judgment made in A.S. No. 13 of 1995 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Addanki. Likewise, Second Appeal No. 210 of 1999 is preferred as against the selfsame decree and judgment by defendants 2 and 3 and hence both these matters are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The first respondent in these second appeals Ravipati Subba Rao filed the suit O.S. No. 199 of 1984 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Addanki, praying for the relief of specific performance of agreement of sale dated 18.6.1981. The learned District Munsif, on the strength of respective pleadings of the parties, having settled the issues, recorded the evidence of PWs. 1 to 3, DWs. 1 to 3, marked Exs. A. 1 to A. 4, Ex.B. 1 and ultimately came to the conclusion that the plaintiff was not entitled to the relief of specific performance of agreement of sale dated 18.6.1981 and d...
Vannala Koteshwar Rao Vs. Municipal Corporation
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD728; 2008(4)ALT42
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The appellant filed O.S. No. 1329 of 2002 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal, against the respondent, for the relief of perpetual injunction, in respect of the suit schedule property. He pleaded that he is the absolute owner of the property, comprising of 562 square yards with compound wall and fencing, bearing Municipal No. 10/692/8, corresponding to new No. 10-8-86 of Girmajipet, Warangal. He traced his title to the land, through a sale deed, dated 21.10.1974. Alleging that the respondent is interfering with his possession, the appellant sought for the relief of perpetual injunction. The respondent denied the very title of the appellant as well as the possession over the suit schedule property. Even the correctness of the description of the property was doubted. Through its judgment, dated 8.2.2007, the trial Court dismissed the suit. Against the same, the appellant filed A.S. No. 21 of 2007 in the Court of V Additional District Judge, War...
G. Venkata Reddy and Co. Engineers and Contractors Rep. by Its Managin ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)ALT720; 2008(2)ARBLR301(AP)
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. This application is filed, under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, for appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the disputes, referred to in the applicant's letter dated 27.06.2006, arising out of the agreement dated 31.01.2000.2. The applicant, a registered partnership firm and a special class contractor, entered into an agreement with the respondent on 31.01.2000 for excavation and removal of overburden and production of Barytes Ore (ROM), loading, transportation, unloading and leveling at Mangampeta Barytes project, Mangampeta village, near Koduru railway station, Cuddapah district. The scheduled date of completion of the work, under the agreement of three years duration, was extended upto 08.03.2005. On completion of the work, and after receiving final payment on furnishing a 'no claim certificate', the applicant, in their letter dated 27.06.2006, consolidated their claims for Rs. 22 crores with interest thereon. They requested the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »