Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
Diddi Kumaraswamy Vs. Pathakala Bhaskar and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD516; 2008(3)ALT223; 2008(2)ARBLR573(AP)
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner filed EP No. 92 of 2005, in the Court of District Judge, Warangal, for execution of a Settlement-cum-Award, dated 9.10.2002, said to have been rendered in an Arbitration, between himself and the respondents. It was pleaded that the father of the respondent No. 1 borrowed a sum of Rs. 14,000/- from the petitioner on 10.6.1993, and agreed to sell the house bearing No. 15- 189/2, Narsampet, at the price that may be fixed by the elders. Possession was also said to have been delivered to the petitioner. It is stated that an agreement was executed by the father of the 1st respondent, stipulating the consideration for the property, at Rs. 60,000/- and adjusting the amount of Rs. 14,000/-, together with the accrued interest, amounting to about Rs. 40,000/-. The petitioner alleged that when he offered to pay the balance of Rs. 19,960/-, the 1st respondent and his father refused to receive it, and that there upon the matter was referred to Arbitrators...
Agricultural Market Committee Rep. by Its Chairman, Sri Nanga Rajarath ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALD731; 2008(3)ALT115
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri M.N. Narsimha Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Agriculture representing Respondents 1 to 3.2. Respondent No. 4 is served and none represents Respondent No. 4.3. The writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus praying this Court to direct the respondents 2 to 4 not to interfere with day-to-day functions of the Petitioner-Market Committee holding that the impugned order of the second respondent in his Letter No. S1 (3)5959/2005, dated 19-11-2007 in which the acts done by the Market Committee are declared as invalid, withdrawing the cheque power of Chairman as arbitrary, illegal and to pass such other suitable orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.4. This Court issued Rule Nisi on 14-12-2007. Counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of Respondent No. 2. Though the matter is appearing under the caption of 'interlocutory', at the request of the counsel o...
P.F. Khan E. 406046 Vs. Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ALT234
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner was employed as a driver in the year 1992 in APSRTC. On 25.03.2003, while he was driving a bus, bearing No. AP 11 Z 150, of Anantapur Depot, on the route Anantapur-Madanapalli, an accident has taken place, resulting in the death of driver and pillion rider of a motor bike, bearing No. AP 03 H 2878.2. Alleging that the petitioner drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner, and caused the accident, the 1st respondent initiated disciplinary proceedings. A charge sheet, dated 05.05.2003, was issued. The petitioner submitted his explanation. Departmental enquiry was conducted and the 1st respondent passed an order dated 26.07.2003, directing removal of the petitioner, from service. Appeal preferred by the petitioner to the Divisional Manager was dismissed on 16.01.2004, and review filed before the Regional Manager was rejected on 19.06.2004.3. The petitioner filed I.D. No. 210 of 2004 in the Labour Court, Anantapur, assailing the order of remov...
Shaik Lalbi and anr. Vs. M. Balakrishnan and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ498; 2008(3)ALD636
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri N. Subba Rao, learned Counsel representing the appellants and Smt. A. Malathi, learned Counsel representing second respondent.2. Sri N. Subba Rao, learned Counsel representing the appellants would maintain that the order made by the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, Guntur-cum-II Additional District Judge, Guntur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for the purpose of convenience) is contrary to the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience). Learned Counsel would submit that the Tribunal failed to appreciate that as per Section 166 of the Act, the legal representatives of the deceased would be entitled to make an application for award of compensation. The Counsel would also submit that clear view had been expressed by the Apex Court in Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation v. Ratnanbhai Prabhatbhai : [1987]3SCR404 , and in the light of view expressed, the brothers and sisters...
Darapaneni Krishna Murthy Vs. Superintendent of Police and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ALD105; 2008(4)ALT545
ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in calling the petitioner to the police station, threatening him to vacate the premises in question and also in taking signatures on the white papers, as illegal and without jurisdiction. The petitioner also sought for a direction to the respondents not to interfere with his business when the dispute is pending in O.S. No. 510 of 2007 on the file of the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur.2. Heard Sri R. Venkata Rao representing Sri T. Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home.3. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner alleged that under an oral lease between him and Kolli Padmini Devi, he has been carrying on the business of manufacturing hollow bricks and well rings in the name and style of Sri Kanka Durga Enterprises, that he has been paying the agreed rent ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›