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.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mamidi Radha and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD562
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Respondents 1 to 3, who are the widow and parents of Mamidi Chandraiah (the deceased), filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act), seeking a compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- from the 4th respondent, who is the owner of Auto bearing No. APIT 9451, and the appellant, who is the insurer of the said Auto, alleging that the deceased, who was aged about 23 years and earning about Rs. 1,500/- per month by doing agricultural coolie work, had while travelling in the said Auto, died due to an accident caused as a result of the rash and negligent driving of its driver. 4th respondent chose to remain ex parte. Appellant filed its counter inter alia contending that it is not liable to pay any compensation inasmuch as the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid driving licence. In support of their case, the claimants examined one witness as P.W.I and marked Exs.A.1 to A.5 on their behalf. The appellant examined one witne...
State of A.P. Vs. Computer Graphics Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2008
Reported in: (2009)21VST42(AP)
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. The respondent, a private limited concern, dealing in photographic paper and film, filed returns of its monthly turnovers under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (the Act) in form CST-6 disclosing nil turnovers. When the respondent was called upon by the commercial tax authorities to produce its account books for verification of the correctness of the turnovers reported by it, the respondent produced its books of account before the assessing authority. The assessing authority held that the turnover of Rs. 14,225 by stock transfer from one branch of the respondent to its another branch at Bangalore is exempt, but as there was inter-State sale of photographic paper and film worth Rs. 33,50,727 by the respondent, it is liable to tax at 10 per cent on the said turnover. Questioning the same the respondent preferred an appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, inter alia, contending that inasmuch as it did not effect any inter-State sales but ha...
Janapati Jaipal Reddy Vs. Sannihita Chit Funds Pvt. Limited, Rep. by I ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ALD735; 2008(5)ALT17
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order in E.P. No. 116 of 2007 in O.S. No. 58 of 2002 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar District.2. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of money and it was decreed for an amount of Rs. 2,87,471/- with interest. The decree holder filed E.P. No. 116 of 2007 in the same Court which passed the decree for realization of Rs. 4,92,059/- towards the amount covered by the decree with interest and costs by way of attachment of the salary of the petitioner. The revision petitioner being J.Dr. in the said E.P. challenged the order on the ground that the E.P. is not maintainable as he is working in Adilabad District, which is beyond the jurisdiction of the Karimnagar Court and the execution proceedings ought to have been taken only after the transfer of the decree in the local Court of Adilabad District, therefore, he requested to set aside the order passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, i...
The Employees State Insurance Corporation, Rep. by Its Manager Vs. the ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD219; 2008(5)ALT625; (2009)ILLJ829AP
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. This Appeal has been preferred by the Employees State Insurance Corporation, which is the opposite party in O.A.No.1 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool.2. The respondent herein filed the Application under Section 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'E.S.I. Act') against the opposite party to declare that the order of demand, dated 16-09-1997 calling for the contributions for the period from 26- 03-1978 to 31-03-1993 is null and void and for consequential injunction restraining the opposite party from acting on the show cause notice, dated 16-09-1997.3. The Applicant filed the Application by contending that the notice is null and void and it is not covered by the provisions of the E.S.I. Act, therefore, the respondent is not liable to pay the contribution under the said Act. The lower Court accepted the said contention and allowed the Application by declaring that the Applicant is not covered by the provisions of t...
Mallela Anantha Padmanabha Rao Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Endowments ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD257; 2008(5)ALT614
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 91 of A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act 1987, in short referred to as 'Act' for the purpose of convenience, aggrieved by the Decree and Judgment dated 20-9-2006 made by the VI Additional District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam in A.S.No.60/2006 confirming the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kakinada dated 25-10-2005. 2. this Court , while admitting the Civil Revision Petition on 8-12-2006 in C.R.P.M.P.No.8521/2006 granted interim suspension. 3. The petitioner filed O.A.No.35/2004 under Section 87 of the Act to declare him as founder trustee/founder family member of Sri Sitaramaswamy Temple @ Sri Sitaramanjaneya Swamy Temple, Ibrahimpatnam, Krishna District by setting aside the proceedings of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department in Rc.A1/86/1993 dated 4-1-1993 declaring the same as arbitrary, capricious, illegal and als...
S. Nagarathnamma Vs. P. Muralidhar Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD415; 2008(6)ALT303
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, the learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner. The 1st respondent-petitioner was served but none represents the 1st respondent.2. The civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as against an order made in IA No. 394/2007 in Election OP No. 3/2006 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Pattikonda. The 1st respondent herein as petitioner filed the said IA No. 394/2007 in EOP No. 3/2006 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Pattikonda under Order IX Rule 9 Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Code' for the purpose of convenience) praying for restoration of Election Petition which was dismissed on 20.8.2007. The learned Junior Civil Judge, Pattikonda after referring to the provisions of the Code and also Rule 7 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj (Election Tribunals in respect of Gram Panchayats, Mandal Parishads and Zilla Parishads) Rules, 1995 (in short referred to as 'th...
General Manager, S.C. Railway and ors. Vs. G. Kameswara Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD785
C.V. Ramulu, J.1. This writ petition has been directed against the order made in O.A. No. 455 of 1997 dated 6.1.1999 (as amended on 2.2.1999) on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad.2. The 1st respondent, who is the applicant in O.A. No. 455 of 1997 before the Tribunal, was an employee of erstwhile Nizam State Railways in the Grain-Shop Department and upon abolition of Grain shop Department, the 1st respondent was absorbed in the Indian Railways and was deputed as Commercial Clerk, and thereafter he was transferred as Office Clerk.3. It appears, the petitioners have published seniority list dated 25.3.1987 showing the respondent No. l at serial No. 14. In fact, the respondent No. l was promoted as O.S. Grade II with retrospective effect. While that being so, the impugned order was passed cancelling the promotion of the respondent No. l as O.S. Grade II, and the same was challenged before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after going through the entire p...
The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kondakotla Sar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-17-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1127; 2008(5)ALD288; 2008(5)ALT246
A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. The Insurance Company filed this appeal challenging the correctness of order dated 26-11-2002 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge), Nizamabad in O.P No 1173 of 2001.2. The facts, in nutshell, giving rise to this appeal are that respondent No. 1 is the wife, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the sons and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are the mother and father of the deceased K. Rajamouli who died in a motor vehicle accident on 24-04-2001 at 3.30 am in the shivar of Devanpally Village. While he was proceeding from Kamareddy towards Banswada in a jeep bearing No. AP 25 F 1895 owned by respondent No. 6 and insured with the appellant - Insurance Company. Due to the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by its driver, the vehicle turned turtle when it reached shivar of Devanpally Village as a result of which the deceased sustained multiple injuries and died on the spot. On the death of the deceased, respondent Nos. 1 to 5 moved the Tribunal b...
Mannaru Penchalaiah Vs. Patnam Venkamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-17-2008
Reported in: AIR2008AP253; 2008(5)ALD11; 2008(4)ALT788
ORDERGopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. As the question of fact and law involved in these two civil revision petitions are one and the same, these matters are taken up together for disposal by this common order.2. These civil revision petitions are directed against two interlocutory applications filed in two different suits which are pending on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nellore whereby the learned Junior Civil Judge, refused to send the lease agreement dated 5.12.2001 to the Revenue Divisional Officer for impounding it.3. Brief facts are that the petitioner herein i.e. the plaintiff filed the suits against the respondents herein for grant of permanent injunction on the basis of a lease agreement dated 5.12.2001. According to the petitioner, the plaint schedule property originally belonged to the defendants, but by virtue of the lease agreement, he is in possession of the property. The suit is one for permanent injunction and to establish his possession of the property he i...
T.S. Benarjee and ors. Vs. Jannu Ruthamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-17-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD107; 2008(4)ALT786
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Respondents 1 to 4 filed O.S. No. 53 of 2000 in the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, against respondents 5 to 9 and the petitioners herein, for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. During the pendency of the suit, some of the defendants died, and their legal representatives were brought on record. The petitioners were impleaded in the suit as defendants 8 to 12, through orders of the Trial Court in I.A. No. 1009 of 2003, as subsequent purchasers.2. The trial of the suit commenced, and the evidence on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4 (plaintiffs), was concluded. The affidavits, in lieu of chief-examination of some of the defendants, including the petitioners, were filed. The petitioners herein were cross-examined on 4.4.2008, on behalf of some of the defendants. Their cross-examination on behalf of the plaintiffs was due. On 25.4.2008, Counsel for the respondents 1 to 4 (plaintiffs), requested the tr...