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.
Mohd. QamruddIn and ors. Vs. Masula Narsimhulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-2008
Reported in: AIR2008AP249; 2008(5)ALD314; 2008(5)ALT51
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Venkat Raghu Ramulu, learned Counsel representing revision petitioners and Sri Anand representing Sri Y. Ashok Raj, representing respondent.2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 28.4.2008 and granted interim stay for a limited period. The matter is coming up for admission.3. Sri Venkat Raghu Ramulu learned Counsel representing the revision petitioners would maintain that the learned Judge failed to see that the District Collector, Mahabubnagar, had rightly rejected for impounding the alleged agreement of sale dated 24.6.1995. The Counsel also would maintain that the learned Judge failed to see that the alleged agreement of sale dated 24.6.1995 is a created and concocted document by the respondent herein for the purpose of filing the suit i.e., OS No. 8 of 2003. The Counsel also pointed out that the learned Judge failed to see that the alleged agreement of sale dated 24.6.1995 was not executed by anybody and the said document was got up by t...
Vankadaru Subba Rao Vs. Vankadaru Ramesh Babu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALT601
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 23-7-2007 passed by the II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, returning the Transfer O.P. filed by the petitioner by observing that the said Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the transfer O.Ps. and directed to present before the proper Court.2. The petitioner mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the transfer O.P. that the respondents 1 and 2 filed a suit for partition in the Court of III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, against him and other respondents for partition of the suit property contending that it is a joint family property. The respondents 1 and 2 are not having any sort of right, interest or share in the property, as the suit schedule property is his self-acquired property. The respondents filed the suit to harass him and coerce him for a compromise. The respondents 1 and 2 and their mother, who is the wife of the petitioner, are living separately since a long...
A.R. Swamy Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD310; (2009)IILLJ397AP
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner was employed in the Kavali Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C., as Mechanic. He was issued a charge-sheet dated 30.11.2002, by the Depot Manager, alleging certain acts of misconduct Petitioner submitted his explanation denying the charges. The 2nd respondent passed an order dated 19.2.2003, imposing the punishment of deferment of increment, for a period of six months, without cumulative effect. Departmental appeal filed against the order, before the Divisional Manager; was rejected.2. The petitioner approached the 1st respondent, with a request to refer the dispute, that arose out of the order of punishment dated 19.2.2003, to the Labour Court, for adjudication. Conciliation was undertaken, and it failed. As regards the reference of the dispute to the Labour Court, the 1st respondent issued letter dated 23.7.2007, informing the petitioner that since he had already retired from service in the year 2003 itself, it is not feasible to accede to the request. I...
Baddam Prathap Reddy S/O Rathna Reddy Vs. Chennadi Jalapathi Reddy S/O ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-12-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD200; 2008(5)ALT192
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. The suit for specific performance, being O.S. No. 91 of 1996, on the file of the Court of the III Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, filed by the first respondent herein (hereafter called, the plaintiff), was decreed on 05.12.2003 directing the appellant herein (hereafter called, first defendant) to execute sale deed for House No. 1-5-266 (new) situated at Kaman Road, Karimnagar, and further directing first defendant to induct the plaintiff into possession of the eastern portion of the suit house by evicting the tenant. The second respondent herein (hereafter called, second defendant) is statedly the person to whom first defendant and his brother, Baddam Ram Reddy, sold their respective shares in the suit house in February and April 1986. For this reason, the second defendant was added as proper and necessary party. 2. Plaintiff is related to first defendant. He is son-in-law of the elder sister of the first defendant. Admittedly, he has been staying in the western...
Muddana Malleswara Rao Vs. Karanam Ramaiah and Nagaratnamma Charities ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-12-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD592; 2008(5)ALT776
V.V.S. Rao, J.1. This is a regular first appeal by defendant Muddana Malleswara Rao @ Karanam Sambasiva Rao against judgment and decree in O.S.No.32 of 1982 declaring that plaintiff/respondent, namely, Karanam Ramaiah and Nagaratnamma Charities, Thimmasamudram village (hereafter called, Trust), is absolute owner of plaint-A schedule properties consisting of four items of immovable assets and for permanent injunction. Be it noted, suit was tried along another suit being O.S.No.110 of 1982 filed by one Muddana Nagendrudu, who is none other than natural father of Sambasiva Rao. The said suit for partition and separate possession of suit schedule properties was dismissed but no appeal is filed against the same. Be it also noted that evidence was recorded in O.S.No.110 of 1982.2. Before noticing summary of pleadings in the suit a brief account of family relationship between Venkataratnamma and Sambasiva Rao may be noticed. Karanam Ramaiah and his wife Nagaratnamma were issueless couple. The...
Siddavarapu Siva Kota Reddy Vs. State Bank of India, Indukurpeta Branc ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-12-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD317
ORDERGopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. The defendant, whose interlocutory application, being IA No. 852 of 2007 in OS No. 412 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore, was dismissed, by order dated 31.8.2007, filed this revision.2. Brief facts are that the respondent-Bank instituted the above suit for recovery of money against the petitioner herein stating that it advanced loan to the petitioner for purchase of a tractor and the petitioner mortgaged the properties and thereafter, as the loan amount was not repaid, the said suit was instituted.3. Petitioner filed written statement opposing the suit and stating that the respondent-Bank granted loan in his favour and thereafter, he has deposited his title deeds. But subsequently, the tractor was not delivered to him, due to fraud, and he is also not in possession of the tractor. However, taking advantage of the title deeds, the respondent instituted the suit, as if the tractor was delivered and that the p...
Hindustan Coca-cola Beverages Ltd. Vs. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh and ors ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-12-2008
Reported in: AIR2008AP241
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. This writ of certiorari has been filed to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the District Registrar and Collector, R.R. District, dated 20-9-2004 and to quash the same as illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently to direct the respondents to release the conveyance deed, dated 26-12-1997 before the third respondent to the petitioner.2. The petitioner is a registered company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act and is dealing in bottling and distribution of non-alcoholic beverages. For the purpose of expansion of its business, the petitioner had negotiated with M/s. Spectra Bottling Company Limited to take over its business including the land and buildings at Moul-a-ali, R.R. District. The petitioner purchased the land admeasuring Acs. 9-31 guntas along with buildings for a total consideration of Rs. 15 crores. The vendor M/s. Spectra Bottling Company Limited had executed a sale deed, dated 26-12-1997 conveying the sa...
Smt. Ananthamma Vs. the Spl. Deputy Collector, L.A. Unit, P.J.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ALD771; 2008(6)ALT176
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri N. Vasudeva Reddy, learned Counsel representing revision petitioner. The respondent had been served, proof of service had been filed and none represents the respondent.2. Sri N. Vasudeva Reddy, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner would maintain that the learned Senior Civil Judge, Narayanpet, committed a serious irregularity in holding that the claimant-petitioner is not entitled for interest from 20.7.2001 i.e., the date of dismissal of O.P. till the disposal of the main O.P. The learned Counsel also would maintain that the learned Judge ought to have appreciated the fact that the grant of interest is a statutory relief under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (as amended by Act 68 of 1984) as such the said relief cannot be denied nor subjected to any condition. The learned Counsel also would maintain that the learned Judge ought to have appreciated the fact that the interest is payable on the market value, solatium and the...
Union of India (Uoi) Through Deputy Chief Signal and Telecom Engineer ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)ALT262
ORDERK.C. Bhanu, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the order, dated 7-7-2005, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad, (for brevity 'the Tribunal') in O.A. No. 1277 of 2004 and quash the same as it is contrary to law.2. Petitioners herein are the respondents, whereas the respondent herein is the applicant, in the O.A., before the Tribunal.3. Brief facts, that are necessary for disposal of the present Writ Petition, may be stated as follows:The respondent herein filed the above O.A. before the Tribunal inter alia stating that while he was working as Chief Office Superintendent, he was transferred to Chilakalaguda Stores Department as Office Superintendent, which is under the control of Senior DSTE (Construction). When he was transferred, he was directed to take the charge of stores from M. Bhagawandas, Office Superintendent II, in wh...
Surylaxmi Cotton Mills Limited, Rep. by Its Managing Director Parithos ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)ALD82; 2008(5)ALT520
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri K. Srinivas, the learned Counsel representing the Revision Petitioner and Sri Neeli Narsappa, the learned Counsel representing the 1st respondent.2. The Civil Revision Petition is preferred by the 1st respondent/plaintiff in I.A. No. 323/2007 in O.S. No. 305/2006 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Kalwakurthi as against an order made therein dated 24-9-2007.3. This Court ordered notice before admission on 23-1-2008 and granted interim suspension for a limited period which is being extended from time to time. On 15-4-2008 while admitting the Civil Revision Petition, this Court extended the interim suspension already granted until further orders. Thus, the Civil Revision Petition is coming up for Final Hearing today.4. The application aforesaid was filed by the 1st respondent herein/1st defendant in the suit under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (b) r/w. Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter in short referred to as 'Code' for the purpose of conve...