Andhra Pradesh Court November 2009 Judgments

M/S Sree Sai Krishna Constructions M.V.P. Colony Rep. by Its Managing ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order (Sri R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) The appeal is challenged to the order passed by the District Forum-II, Visakhapatnam in C.C.No.812 of 2003. The factual matrix of the case as set out in the complaint is that the complainant entered into construction agreement with the opposite parties and purchased undivided share in the total extent of 570 sq.yards each in an extent of 46 sq. yards whereby the opposite parties agreed to provide car parking slot to the complainants. The opposite parties did not provide car parking slot even though they were bound to provide it for each and every flat owner as per the byelaws of the apartment and in view of the decision of High Court of A.P. The opposite parties are bound to provide car parking slot and for not providing it they have to pay compensation. On 23.9.1998 registered sale deed was executed and consequent to failure of the opposite parties to provide parking slot, legal notice dated 24.10.2002 was got issued by the complainant. ...

United India Insurance Co.Ltd., Rep. by Its Divisional Manager Vs. Kot ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order : (Smt. M. Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.294/2007 on the file of Dist. Forum, Guntur, the opposite party preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the first complainants father took insurance policy while he was alive which is called TAILOR MADE PERSONAL ACCIDENT SCHEME FOR ENGINEERING STUDENTS AND PARENTS. The said policy was issued by the opposite party on 18.10.2005 and was valid upto 17.10.2009 . The nature of policy is an educational policy for engineering students who qualified in the EAMCET rank and the policy is issued jointly in the name of student, parent or his guardian and this student paid Rs.680/- towards premium and the policy specifies that in case of an accidental death of the parent or guardian Rs.3 lakhs will be paid to the nominee+ tuition fee upto Rs.25,000/- p.a. and boarding charges upto Rs.25,000/-p.a. and if there is an accidental death of student Rs.2 lakhs would be paid to the insured ...

George Karimalli and Another Vs. M/S Sri Bhargav Builders a Registered ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order (Sri R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) The appellants are unsuccessful complainants in the C.D.No.299 of 1997 on the file of District forum, Hyderabad. The appellants purchased the undivided share of flat from the owners of the land and to the effect sale deed dated 21.11.1992 was executed in favour of the appellants. Thereafter the appellants entered into construction agreement with the respondent for construction of a flat, on the assurance of the respondent that the flat would be constructed in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad within 9 months from the date of handing over of the premises to them. It was agreed that the appellant would pay the amount in instalments as shown in the agreement. The appellants as such had paid entire cost of the flat. Subsequently the appellants came to know that the respondent had played fraud on them by making additions in the plan without that particular portion of the plan was not approved b...

The Assistant Director of Insurance Apgli, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Ku ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

(Typed to the dictation of Sri K.Satyanand, Honble Member). This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties APGLI of Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by officers at two levels challenging the order passed by the Forum that went in favour of the complainant. The facts of the case as culled out from the pleadings and record are briefly as follows: The complainant is the widow of a Government Employee by name Sri Guru Prasad. By virtue of the mandatory provisions of APGLI rules, he was made to take out ALGLI insurance policy. In that regard, the premium came to be deducted from his salary by the disbursing officer all along. In the first instance, he obtained policy No.4309168 for which the premium that was being collected with effect from June, 1991 was Rs.24/-. Later he enhanced the premium obviously in the wake of the imposition of flat rates linked to the quantum of salary by Rs.36 and thence forward an amount of Rs.60/- came to be deducted from his salary towards premium til...

M/S Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited and Another Vs. ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

(R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) The opposite parties no.1 and 2 has filed the appeal challenging the order of the District Forum-II, Hyderabad in C.D.No.1067 of 2005. The facts of the case as narrated in the complaint are that the respondent had obtained insurance policy bearing No.VC00012953000101 for his Tata Tipper lorry for a sum assured of Rs.4,20,000/- for the period from 10.6.2004 to 9.6.2005. The lorry met with an accident on 29.5.2005 whereby extensive damage was sustained to the vehicle. The respondent had lodged a claim with the appellants and the same was repudiated on the ground that the cleaner of the vehicle was driving the lorry at the time of the accident and he did not held any valid driving license to drive the lorry. The respondent had got issued legal notice and thereafter he has filed the complaint before the District Forum. The appellants have resisted the claim by filing counter. It was contended that as per the police record the accident occurred when the clea...

The Executive Engineer and Another Vs. Smt Ghanta Nagalalitha

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order (Sri R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) The appeal is filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking to set aside the impugned order passed against the opposite party in C.C.No.185 of 2006 by the District Forum, Krishna II at Vijayawada. The respondent filed complaint stating that he purchased flat in Phase II in Block No.57, Flat No.2 on 19-08-2002 from the original allottee, Kothuri Padma Raju. On 30-11-2004 the respondent had submitted to the appellant an application along with relevant documents for execution of the registered sale deed. On 2-12-2004 the respondent had requested the appellant to execute the sale deed. On 16-12-2004 the appellant got published notice calling for objection for third party transfer In favour of the respondent. The appellant had not executed the registered sale deed in favour of the respondent. Delay in execution of the sale deed was attributed to the appellant on the premise that they have demanded the respondent to submit irrel...

Tungana Jalaja Kumar Vs. Sri Vigneswara Constructions Rep. by Its Prop ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

(R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) The complainant in whose favour the complaint was allowed, having been dissatisfied with the order passed by the District Forum in I.A.No.348 of 2007 in E.A.No.113 of 2007 in C.D.No.265 of 2003 has preferred the appeal contending that the order passed by the District forum for cancellation of the sale deed is not sustainable and beyond the scope of the orders of this Commission. The complainant has filed complaint seeking directions to the opposite party for refund of the amount of Rs.2,27,475/- along with interest thereon in addition to damages and costs. The District Forum has dismissed the complaint holding that it had passed an order in C.D.No.924 of 2001 with a direction to the complainant to approach a civil court. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum the complainant has filed appeal F.A.No.1472 of 2004. The State Commission allowed the appeal by setting aside the order of the District Forum and directed the opposite parties to refund R...

K. Nithesh Kumar (Dr.) and ors. Vs. Dr. Ntr University of Health Scien ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(1)ALT15

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioners joined in different Post Graduate Degree courses in the academic year 2006-2007 in various institutions, affiliated to the respondent university. They are at the verge of completion of the courses. Some of them are said to be meritorious and awarded gold medals in certain subjects. Examinations were conducted in June, 2009. According to the norms stipulated by the University, a candidate must secure minimum of 50% of marks, both in theory papers, carrying 400 marks and practicals, carrying 300 marks. The petitioners were declared failed in one subject or the other on the ground that they did not secure the minimum of 50% marks in the subject concerned, be it in theory or practical. It is their common case that they fall short by less than five marks.2. The petitioners contend that the University framed regulations of providing for addition of five marks in case the same would result any candidate being declared pass and such facility was de...

The Postmaster General Abids, Hyderabad and Others Vs. Shaik Mastan Va ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order (Sri R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) The appeal is a challenge to the order passed by the District Forum-II, Vijayawada at Krishna. The appellants are the postmaster general and two others challenge the impugned order whereof the factual matrix of the case is that the respondent applied for Group-II examinations held by the A.P.P.S.C. The service commission had dispatched hall ticket on 24.9.2005 to the respondent in respect of the examination that was to be held on 8.10.2005 and on the same date at 11.30 a.m. the appellant had delivered the hall ticket to the respondent and thereby deprived him of attending at the examination. The respondent had contended that he lost his future prospects because of negligence of the appellants as he had undergone coaching there were prospect for him to secure the job as also it was last chance for him to appear at the examination and in future he would not be entitled to appear for any of such examination. The hall ticket was dispatched 1...

Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Staff and Workers Union Vs. Joint Commissione ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(1)ALT2

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is a Trade-Union formed by the members of staff and workers of Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, Pydi Bhimavaram Village, Srikakulam District. In the verification conducted during last year, it emerged as a majority union.2. Respondents 1 and 2 initiated steps for recognition of the majority union. It appears that, only one more union exists, namely Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Employees and Workers Union. The 2nd respondent proposed to conduct the verification on 9-11 -2009, through secret ballot between 9.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. The petitioner challenges the action of the 2nd respondentand seeks a. writ of Mandamus dzchxing that the 2nd respondent has no authority to conduct verification and to set aside the proceedings, dated 24-10-2009, issued by them, in this regard. Further relief is also prayed for, to include 48 senior executives of the Laboratory in the voters' list.3. Heard Sri V. Sudhakar Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Gover...