Andhra Pradesh Court February 2008 Judgments

Chief Rationing Officer and anr. Vs. T.V. Rama Sarma

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(4)ALD82; 2008(3)ALT612; (2008)IIILLJ543AP

ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the petitioners, as well as the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent.2. This Writ of Certiorari is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to quash the order, dated 6-11-2007, passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for brevity 'the Tribunal'), allowing O.A. No.4517 of 2007, filed by the respondent herein, seeking to set aside the proceedings Rc. No. A1/2203/2001/Proceedings No. 201/2007, dated 7-7-2007, of the Chief Rationing Officer, Hyderabad, petitioner No. 1 herein. Petitioners are the respondents and the respondent is the applicant, in the O.A., before the Tribunal. For the sake of convenience, in this order, the petitioners and the respondent will be referred to as 'the petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 2' and 'the respondent', respectively.3. The facts, in brief, are that the respondent, while working as a Senior Assistant under th...

Tata Venkata Shiva Maheshwara Rao Vs. the Manager, Centurian Bank of P ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(3)ALD488; 2008(6)ALT597; (2008)2CompLJ534(AP)

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri B.Shanker, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner and Sri B.S.Prasad, learned Counsel representing the respondents.2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 01.11.2007 and granted status quo for a limited period, which is being extended from time to time.3. The writ petition is filed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the Flat bearing No. 101, H. No. 1-6- 16/6/B, situated at Plot No. 11, S. No. 228, Sri Santoshi Nilayam, Phanigiri Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad and to pass such other suitable orders.4. Sri B.Shanker, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner had taken this Court through the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and would maintain that in the light of the view expressed by the learned Judge of the Karnataka High Court in Hutchison Essar South Ltd. v. Union Bank Of India AIR 2008 Kant 14, at the best symbolic possession can be ...

Morthala Chander Rao Vs. the Andhra Bank Rep. by Its Authorised Office ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(6)ALD780

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri A. Prabhakar Rao, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner and Dr.K.Lashminarasimha, learned Counsel representing the first respondent.2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 14.09.2007 and granted an order of status quo for a limited period, which had been extended for further limited period.3. W.V.M.P. No. 2763 of 2007 is filed to vacate the said interim order of status quo.4. At the request of the learned Counsel on record, the writ petition itself is being disposed of finally.5. The writ petition is filed for issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the notice, dated 31.07.2007, in letter No. 679/11/272 issued by the first respondent seeking to take possession of the premises bearing Nos. 13-1-96 (old 13/78) and 12-1-14, situated at Papaiahpet Chaman, S.V.N.Road, Mattawada, Warangal District, dispossessing the petitioner from the said premises insofar as it relating to portions under his occupation, as illegal and arbitrary and cons...

S. Kiran Kumar Vs. Centurion Bank of Punjab Limited

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Mrs. M. Shreesha, Member: Oral: 1. Aggrieved by the order in C.D. No. 577 of 2006 on the file of District Forum-III, Hyderabad, the complainant preferred this appeal. 2. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant purchased a Hero Honda Motor Cycle by availing vehicle loan from the opposite party bank in August 2004 for an amount of Rs. 38,000 and paid the following EMI amounts.Date of PaymentTotal amount paid8.10.2004Rs.1,3609.11.2004Rs.1,3609.12.2004Rs.1,3608.1.2005Rs.1,3609.2.2005Rs.1,3609.3.2005Rs.1,36021.4.2005Rs.1,36020.5.2005Rs.1,36030.6.2005Rs.1,36025.7.2005Rs.1,36011.8.2005Rs.1,36026.9.2005Rs.1,36026.10.2005Rs.1,36028.11.2005Rs.1,3605.12.2005Rs.1,36027.1.2006Rs.1,360Initial payment made to the vehicle at showroomRs.11,279TotalRs.33,739 3. On 14.3.2006 he found that his two-wheeler missing from his office and he filed a theft case in Panjagutta Police Station and later came to know that his vehicle was seized by the bank because he did not pay two E...

E.P. Vinaya Sagar Vs. the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-revenue Divisio ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(4)ALD303; 2008(3)ALT92

ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass and they are stated hereunder:The father of the petitioner was the owner of land admeasuring Ac.2.05 guntas comprised in Sy. No. 778/E of Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. He died on 11.04.1975. In the year 1971, the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short, 'the Corporation') requisitioned an extent of Ac.12.33 guntas in Sy. No. 778/AA etc., for construction of a bus depot and bus stand at Kamareddy town. This land included an extent of Ac.1.39 guntas belonging to the father of the petitioner. Draft notification dated 24.01.1972 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was published in the Nizamabad District Gazette on 20.04.1972 and draft declaration was approved by the Government on 25.09.1972 and published in the District Gazette on 23.11.1972. The petitioner claims that possession of the land to the extent of Ac.11.15 guntas, including the land of his father was taken in No...

A.P. State Financial Corporation Vs. Satya Sai Polymers Ltd. (In Liqui ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [2008]142CompCas315(AP)

Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation, a statutory corporation, which advanced certain loans to the first respondent-company in liquidation.2. The appellant is aggrieved by the order passed by the learned single judge in Company Application No. 1609 of 2006, dated July 3, 2007, which is essentially to the following effect:Since claims are required to be invited by the official liquidator and it is only thereafter can such claims, including that of the appellant, be adjudicated it is appropriated that the Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000 with the official liquidator to enable him to incur the required expenditure in inviting claims. The said amount shall be paid by Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation to the official liquidator within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.3. Company Application No. 1609 of 2006, has been preferred b...

Sombathina Ramu Vs. T. Srinivasulu and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009ACJ187; 2008(3)ALD362; 2008(4)ALT14

Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J.1. This C.M.A. is directed against the order, dated 27.01.1999 rendered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Kadapa in M.V.O.P. No. 836 of 1995. 2. The appellant was working as cleaner on a truck bearing registration No. AP-04-T-2299 owned by the first respondent herein. The second respondent has issued the insurance cover, which is marked as Ex.B-1. The appellant-claimant had asserted that the truck in question was proceeding from Delhi to Madras which has been booked up for commercial cargo and en route met with a collision head on with an oil tanker coming in the opposite direction at Dhalghat village in Madhya Pradesh. The appellant was admitted along with the truck driver to the local hospital and from there he had been shifted to M.Y. Hospital, at Indore, Madhya Pradesh State. After a week's treatment there, at his request, the appellant has been discharged and brought over to Kadapa where he has been admitted in the Dist...

Dewan Bahadur Ramgagopal Mills Limited Rep. by Its Managing Director S ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [2008]142CompCas928(AP)

ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. Petitioner - Dewan Bahadur Ramagopal Mills Limited (for short 'DBR Mills') represented by its Managing Director S. Krishnam Raju (for short 'S.K.Raju') questions the order of the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (for short 'BIFR') in Case No. 109/1987, dated 3-5-2007 as illegal, improper and arbitrary as the petitioner company was not given any opportunity to submit its objections, treating it a share holder alone and that the scheme is only between the 4th respondent M/s. Ranga Reddy and Associates (for short 'RRA') and the secured creditors of the company and the company could only raise objections as a share holder and give certain suggestions under the scheme submitted by the RRA, but had no right to submit draft scheme as a creditor or the company or any other person.2. The second respondent Industrial Finance Corporation of India (for short 'IFCI') is appointed as Operating Agency (for short 'OA') under Section 16(2) of the Sick Industrial...

K.L.V. Prasada Rao and ors. Vs. K. Venkateswara Goud and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(2)ALD669; 2008(2)ALT455

ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. The Revision Petitioners are the defendants 8 to 11 in O.S. No. 125 of 2004 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad. This Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the dismissal of their application (I.A. No. 1287 of 2004) filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. for rejection of plaint.2. The respondents 1 to 8 herein are the plaintiffs and the respondents 9 to 15 herein are the defendants 1 to 7 in the suit. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall hereinafter be referred as they are arrayed in the main suit.3. O.S. No. 125 of 2004 has been filed by the plaintiffs for a declaration that the four Registered Sale Deeds bearing Nos. 3667, 3668, 3669 and 3670 of 2000, dated 24.6.2000 in favour of the defendants 8 to 11 are null and void and also for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants 8 to 11 from encumbering the suit schedule property either by way of sale, gift or mortgage or doing any construction over the said property. ...

K. Nagappa S/O Late Mallaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Its ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(2)ALD(Cri)148; 2008(3)ALT129; 2008(2)ALT(Cri)356; 2008CriLJ2147

ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction, declaring G.O. Rt. No. 1842, Law (LA & J Courts A2) Department, dated 28.10.2005, issued by respondent No. 1-Government, as illegal, without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of Section 24 Cr.P.C. and the Instructions issued by respondent No. 1 -Government in G.O. Ms. No. 187, dated 06.12.2000, and to consequently direct respondent No. 1-Government to consider the name of one of the Advocates for appointment to the post of Additional Public Prosecutor in the Court of II Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, from the panel sent by respondent No. 3-Additional District Judge, and pass such other order or orders, as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.2. The petitioner is an Advocate practicing in the Courts at Hindupur, and claims to have a standing of about 12 years. Pursuant to expiry of the term...