Andhra Pradesh Court June 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.
A.B. Patil Vs. Orissa Transport Service, Rep. by Its Branch Manager an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD473
1. this Court ordered C.M.P.No.2125 of 2007 on 20.6.2008 and the dismissal order dated 21.3.2007 made in the second appeal was set aside and the second appeal was restored to file. The second appeal was heard and judgment was reserved on 20.6.2008.2. Sri Agastya Sharma, learned Counsel representing appellant had taken this Court through the substantial questions of law raised in the memorandum of grounds of second appeal and would point out that the appellate court totally erred in reversing the well considered judgment of the trial court. The learned Counsel also had taken this Court through the oral evidence of P.W.1, D.Ws.1 and 2 and also the documentary evidence Exs.A-1 to A-3 and Exs.B-1 to B-5 and would maintain that in the facts and circumstances of the case when the Manager had issued Exs.A-1 to A-3, it may have to be taken that the amounts had been received on behalf of M/s. Orissa Transport Service and in fact the court of first instance appreciated the oral and documentary e...
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, (a Government of India Enterprise), Rep. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: AIR2008AP227; 2008(5)ALD455; 2008(5)ALT654
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This is a Writ Petition filed by the petitioner seeking to declare that the award passed by the Arbitrator on 24-06-2002 as illegal.and void.2. The petitioner is Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Hyderabad. The petitioner filed the present writ petition questioning the award passed by the Arbitrator appointed under Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act.3. The averments of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are briefly as follows:The first respondent is a company incorporated under the Companies Act in the name of M/s. G.V.K. Hotels Limited and a telephone connection bearing No. 220618 (3390618) was provided on 28-06-1986 to the premises Door No. 6-3-249/10, Road No. 1, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-34. The said telephone number was transferred in the name of M/s. Novapan Industries Limited. Due to subsequent changes, the name of the company is at present M/s. Taj GVK Hotels & Resorts Limited and the telephone number 3390618 was installed on 10-09-1994...
Ravi Majji Gouri Vara Prasad Rao and ors. Vs. Govt. of India, Rep. by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD50; 2008(5)ALT1; [2008(119)FLR944]
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The question that arises for consideration in these two writ petitions is identical. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order.2. The petitioners are employees of the Bharat Heavy Plate and Vessels Limited, the 3rd respondent herein. The age of superannuation, for retiring from service of the 3rd respondent was 58 years. Vide Circular dated 28.5.1998, the 3rd respondent enhanced it to 60 years. However, this was rolled back, vide order dated 10.4.2001, and as of now, the age of superannuation is 58 years. All the petitioners were issued intimation, to the effect that they have to retire from service, on attaining the age of 58 years.3. The 3rd respondent became a sick unit, and proceedings are before the BIFR, for the past several years. In the recent past, the BHEL, the 2nd respondent herein, agreed in principle, to assume managerial control of the 3rd respondent. The petitioners submitted representation, dated 10.6.2008, stating that the age of ...
Saleema Bee Vs. Syed Abdul Nayeem and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD513; 2008(5)ALT420
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri M.A.K. Mukheed, the learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner and Sri Suresh representing Sri Mahipathi Rao, Counsel for respondents 2 and 3.2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 17.4.2008 and granted interim stay for a limited period.3. The civil revision petition is filed by the unsuccessful petitioner/4th defendant in IA No. 7/2008 in OS No. 8/2008 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge-Fast Track Court-Mahabubnagar. The said application was filed under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act praying for permission to impound the relinquishment deed dated 11.8.1991 by sending the same to the District Collector, Mahabubnagar in the interest of justice. The learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge-Fast Track Court-Mahabubnagar after recording reasons dismissed the said application as being devoid of merit and hence aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/4th defendant had preferred the present civil revision petition under Art...
Kathwal HussaIn Peera Vs. D. Ramalingeswara Reddy and Divisional Manag ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: 2010ACJ226; 2009(1)ALT603; [2009(121)FLR193]
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Appellant, while working as the driver of the lorry belonging to the 1st respondent, which was insured with the 2nd respondent, suffered injuries in an accident that occurred on 22.06.1996 at about 1.30 p.m. So he filed an application under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') seeking compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- from the respondents. First respondent chose to remain ex parte. Second respondent filed its counter contesting the claim. In support of his case, the appellant, besides examining himself as P.W.1, examined the doctor who treated him as P.W.2 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.7. The Commissioner, having held that the appellant sustained injuries out of and during the course of his employment with the 1st respondent and suffered a permanent disability resulting in loss of earning capacity of 70%, awarded Rs. 1,69,733/- as compensation to the appellant against the respondents. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded to him, the injured...
Chinthala Veerabhadra Rao Vs. the State of A.P., Rep. by the Public Pr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)ALD(Cri)207; 2008(3)ALT(Cri)1; 2008CriLJ4239
K.C. Bhanu, J.1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16.04.2005 in Sessions Case No. 353 of 2004 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal, whereunder and whereby the appellant/sole accused was found guilty of the offences, (i) under Section 302 I.P.C., convicted therefor and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year; (ii) under Section 498A I.P.C., convicted therefor and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows:Marriage of the accused with Ch.Aruna (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') was performed about 14 years prior to the incident. They were blessed with two sons. Thereafter, they migrated to Mallampally village and for about 30 days prior to the incident, t...
Smt. Nirmalamma W/O Ramachandra Reddy Vs. Special Deputy Collector, (L ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD235; 2008(5)ALT178
ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. At the interlocutor stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No. 1 in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for payment of compensation under Award dated 13.02.2005, as illegal. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to refer her claim to the competent civil Court under Sections 18 and 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act').3. The petitioner is the sister of respondent No. 5. The property in dispute was owned by the father of the petitioner. The said property was acquired under the provisions of the Act for the purpose of Singoor Project. A sum of Rs. 4,91,008=71 Ps was determined as the market value for the said property under award dated 13.02.2005. The claim petition filed by the petitioner for payment of compensation and refere...
S.V.S. Reddy Vs. Apsrtc Rep. by Its Managing Director and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALT164
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is working as Tyre Mechanic in Rajampet Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. He submitted a complaint to the Depot Manager on 4-1-2008, alleging that one Sri Y.U.M. Rao, a Painter in the same Depot had used filthy and abusive language against him due to union rivalry. A preliminary enquiry was caused by the Depot Manager and, ultimately, on 25-1-2008, the Regional Manager, i.e. the second respondent herein, placed the petitioner under suspension. On the same day, a charge sheet was also issued. This writ petition is filed against the order or suspension, dated 25-1-2008.2. The petitioner states that it was he who submitted a written complaint to the Depot Manager alleging that another employee had used foul and filthy language against him and instead of taking action against the said employee, the second respondent has placed him under suspension.3. On behalf of the respondents, a counter-affidavit is filed stating that the petitioner and an employee, by n...
Modadugu Venkata Subbamma and anr. Vs. Kanamarlapudi Rattaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALT488
V.V.S. Rao, J.Introduction1. These four appeals are interconnected. The property dispute raised in appeals is with reference to various items of immovable property in plaint 'A' and 'B' schedules of O.S. No. 13 of 1974 [In this common judgment all the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in O.S. No. 13 of 1974] (hereafter called, first suit), against which, first defendant filed A.S. No. 2219 of 1982 and defendant Nos. 3 and 4 filed A.S. No. 212 of 1981. Tr.A.S. No. 1277 of 1991 is filed by third defendant, who lost her separate suit for declaration and possession, being O.S. No. 21 of 1975 (hereafter called, second suit). Similarly, Tr.A.S. No. 1274 of 1991 is filed by fourth defendant when his suit, being O.S. No. 22 of 1975 (hereafter called, third suit) for declaration of title was dismissed by the lower Court, by impugned common judgment. The trial Court decreed O.S. No. 13 of 1974 for partition overruling objections of defendant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 that some of the items of pl...
iqbal HussaIn Vs. Central Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD128; 2008(5)ALT42; [2008(119)FLR342]
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner joined the service of erstwhile A.P. Electricity Board as an Attender on 8.12.1970. He studied VIII Class and produced a Transfer Certificate in support of his educational qualifications. The Transfer Certificate contained the date of birth of the petitioner as 15.3.1952. The same was entered in his Service Register. The petitioner was also subjected to Medical Examination and it appears that the Medical Officer opined that the age of the petitioner as on the date of entry into service is 20 years. The petitioner came to know in the year 1986 that his age was mentioned as 20 years in the Service Register. Immediately, he made a representation, dated 18.12.1986, with a request that the date of birth mentioned in Transfer Certificate be treated as final. There was no response. He is sought to be retired from service with effect from 30.6.2008, on the ground that he attains the age of superannuation. The action of the respondents is challenged ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »