Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
Maddula Brahmaiah Vs. Sri Rama Financial Services
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)ALT23
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The civil revision petition was admitted on 27.11.2006 by this Court and interim stay of trial had been granted in CRPMP No. 7786 of 2006. CRPMP No. 4938 of 2008 is filed by the first respondent praying for vacation of the interim stay granted by this Court in the application already specified supra. Respondents 2 to 4 though had been shown as parties in the revision petition, it is specified that they are not necessary parties.2. At the time of hearing of the vacate application CRPMP No. 4938 of 2008, Sri Y.V. Ravi Prasad, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner and Sri Janardhan Rao representing Sri K. Chidambaram, learned Counsel representing the first respondent-plaintiff-vacate petitioner made a request for final disposal of the revision petition itself. Hence, the C.R.P. was heard finally by this Court.3. Sri Y.V. Ravi Prasad, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner would maintain that the petitioner filed application in I.A. No....
Smt. Ratnabai and anr. Vs. Smt. Raju Bai and 2 ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2008
Reported in: 2009(3)ALT134
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Brief episode:Smt. Ratnabai, wife of Lakshma Reddy, who is no more, at present being aggrieved of the dismissal of the partition action in O.S. No. 25 of 1986 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nizamabad, had preferred the present appeal. The said appellant-plaintiff since died, appellant No. 2, the legal representative of the deceased first appellant was brought on record by order dated 05.4.2007 made in A.S.M.P. No. 755 of 2007.2. Defendants 1 to 3 in the suit are respondents 1 to 3 in the present appeal. The said Ratnabai instituted the suit for partition claiming half share in the plaint 'A' and 'B' schedule properties, for mesne profits and other appropriate reliefs. The suit was resisted by the defendants by filing written statements. The learned Subordinate Judge, Nizamabad, in the light of the respective pleadings of the parties having settled the issues, recorded the evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2, D.Ws.1 to 9, marked Exs.A-1 to A-3 and Exs.B-1 to B-40 and aft...
Union of India (Uoi) Rep. by Secretary, Govt. of India, Ministry of Wa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-10-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ALT196
ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J.1. Union of India filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 19-4-1999 passed in O.A. No. 1032 of 1996 on the file of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench. At the outset, it is to be noted that this writ petition is listed before us pursuant to the common order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in I.A. Nos. 25-48 and 49-72 in Transfer Petition (C) Nos. 197-206 and 208-220 of 2005 dated 17-04-2007, by which the present writ petition was also remanded to this Court for deciding the same in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to all the parties.2. The details relevant for deciding this writ petition are that the respondents herein filed the above O.A. with the following relief:.to declare the exclusion of the posts of Assistant Chemist and Assistant Hydrogeologists in the pay scale of Rs. 2000 to 3500 or Rs. 650 to 1200 (pre-revised) scale from the purview of Central Ground Water Board (Group-A posts) Recruitment Ru...
Golla Naarasappa @ Bhutappa S/O Jalappa Vs. the Joint Collector and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD194
ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is filed for a writ of Certiorari to quash order dated 31.05.2001 passed by respondent No.l, whereby he confirmed orders dated 18.09.1998 and 03.07.1999 passed by respondent Nos. 3 and 2 respectively.2. Heard Sri Ghanta Rama Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments) for respondent Nos. 1 to 3, Sri O. Manohar Reddy for respondent Nos. 4 to 6 and perused the record.3. The petitioner purchased different extents of lands admeasuring Ac. 12.08 cents in various survey numbers of Kannepalli Village, Bramhasamudram Mandal, Ananthapur District under a registered sale deed dated 02.08.1969 for a consideration of Rs. 1,000/- from respondent Nos. 4 to 6. Almost two decades later, respondent Nos. 4 to 6 approached respondent No. 3 to resume the lands and restore the same to them on the ground that the alienation made by them in favour of the petitioner is in violation of the provisions o...
Konda Subbaiah Vs. Yedoti Kamalakshaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD290; 2009(3)ALT465
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner filed OS No. 59 of 2005 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Rajampet, against the respondent, for recovery of certain amount. The suit was decreed on 24.7.2006. After the decree became final, the petitioner filed EP No. 50 of 2007, under Order 21 Rule 37 CPC, alleging that, in spite of possessing adequate means, the respondent failed to pay the decretal amount. Notice was issued to the respondent, and he filed a counter-affidavit. He admitted that, he possessed lands, but pleaded that they are not yielding any income. He has also taken the plea that he is a small farmer. The trial Court dismissed the EP, through order dated 9.1.2008, on the ground that the petitioner failed to discharge his burden, to prove that the respondent had adequate means.2. Sri J. Sreenivasa Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that the very approach of the Executing Court, requiring the petitioner to prove beyond any reasonable doubt, that the respondent...
Jupudi Parthasarathy Vs. Kondapalli Rajeswari and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD398; 2008(6)ALT210
ORDERV. Afzulpurkar, J.1. This revision is filed by landlord questioning the order dated 8.8.2002 passed by the learned Appellate Authority (Principal Senior Civil Judge), Rajahmundry in RCA No. 26 of 1999.2. The facts, in brief, are as follows,The petitioner-landlord filed an application for fixation of fair rent vide RCC No. 68 of 1992 before the Rent Controller (Principal Junior Civil Judge,) Rajahmundry. On trial, the learned Rent Controller enhanced the rent from existing Rs. 50/- to Rs. 300/- per month with effect from the date of application under Section 4 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act') i.e., 13.5.1992. The learned Rent Controller also ordered that the landlord shall be entitled for enhancement of rent at the rate of 30% over the existing rent once in three years. The tenant questioned the said order before the Appellate Authority (Principal Senior Civil Judge), Rajahmundry vide R.C.A. No. 26 of 1999 which has been partl...
Y. Gopalakrishna Vs. Balneedi Anjaneyulu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD132; 2008(6)ALT464
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The present civil revision petition is filed by the unsuccessful petitioner in E.O.P. No. 5 of 2006 on the file of the Election Tribunal (Principal Junior Civil Judge), Kowur (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Tribunal' for the purpose of convenience) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The said E.O.P was filed praying for recounting of votes polled for the office of the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Tallapalem, with a further prayer to set aside the election of the first respondent to the post of Sarpanch of Tallapalem Village and for costs and also for such other suitable reliefs.3. At the outset, it may be pointed out that no relief of declaration to declare the petitioner as newly elected Sarpanch in the event of the declaration of the election to the office of the Sarpanch in favour of the first respondent to be set aside by the Tribunal, had been prayed for. The Tribunal, on the strength of the respective pleadings of the parties having f...
Nunna Venkataramana and anr. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ALT524
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. The petitioners herein claim to be the owners and possessors of the land to an extent of Ac.1.20 guntas in Sy. No. 300/E and Ac.4.24 guntas in Sy. No. 300/A of Dornakal Village and Mandal, Warangal District having purchased the same under a Registered Sale Deed, dated 29.3.1997. It is claimed that they were also issued pattadar pass books on 18.6.2007 by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Dornakal. While so, on 9.7.2008 when there was an attempt to dispossess them by the officials of the respondents, they came to know that Ac. 1-19 1/2 guntas out of their land situated in Sy. No. 300/A was acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') for the purpose of construction of a Summer Storage Tank. On enquiry, it was found that the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published in local dailies dated 21.6.2007 and the award was also passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 17.6.2008 fixing the compensation. However, since the n...
Boda Madhava Reddy Vs. State Election Commission and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ALT650
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner appears to be busy body. The elections to the Gram Panchayat, Madhapur Village, Bejjanki Mandal, Karimnagar District were held on 06.08.2006. The third respondent was elected as a Sarpanch. The petitioner filed an application before the Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Bejjanki, on 27.09.2006 under the Right to Information Act, 2005, to know whether the third respondent filed her election expenditure particulars. The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, in turn, issued a reply, dated 24.10.2006, to the petitioner stating that except two candidates, by name B.Shyamala and Gajula Laxman, no other candidates, who contested in the election, have submitted their election expenditure particulars.2. Thereupon, the petitioner gave a representation to the State Election Commission, the first respondent herein, on 13.11.2006 for taking action against the third respondent. Pleading that the third respondent had incurred disqualification to hold the...
Director of Settlements and ors. Vs. Lingareddy Ramakrishna Reddy and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)ALD566; 2008(6)ALT164
G.V. Seethapathy, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 28.01.1997 in W.P. No. 21218 of 1995, wherein the said writ petition filed seeking writ of prohibition restraining' the first respondent-Director of Settlements from proceeding further with the suo motu enquiry pursuant to the notice dated 08.04.1995, was allowed.2. Heard the learned Government Pleader for the appellants and the learned Counsel for the respondents. Perused the records.3. The respondents herein filed writ petition contending that they have been in possession and enjoyment of the subject lands situated in Somavarappadu and Ethamukkala villages, having purchased the same from the original grantees or by inheritance and they acquired occupancy rights in respect of their holding long prior to 01.07.1945. According to them, the lands were originally granted by Raja of Venkatagiri in favour of the predecessors of the writ petitioners more than 100 years ago for the purpose of cultivation and pasturage and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »