Andhra Pradesh Court February 2009 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.
Government of A.P. Rep. by Its Secretary, Irrigation and Cad Departmen ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)ALT402
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J1. These two writ appeals arise out of orders dated 24.07.2008 and 21.07.2008 in WP. Nos. 8889 of 2008 and 2183 of 2008 respectively.The background facts:2. The lands belonging to the respondents were acquired, as they were coming under foreshore submergence of Somasila Project. In respect of the lands of the respondents in W.A. No. 1765 of 2008, a common notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was published on 22.02.1994 and for the lands of the respondents in WA. No. 1785 of 2008, a similar notification was issued on 11.02.1994. Along with the lands of these respondents, lands of others were also acquired under the said two notifications. After following the due procedure, the Land Acquisition Officer (for short, 'the LAO') passed two separate awards covering the respondents in each of these writ appeals respectively in the year 1994. Some of the landowners covered by the two notifications sought for reference to...
Ramoju Satyanarayana Vs. Smt. Jaya Lakshmi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)ALT689
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. Contempt Case is filed alleging violation of the judgment of this Court dated 20-08-2007 in W.P. No. 19643 of 2006.2. The Writ petition was filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to issue notices under Sections 9 and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') to him and his brother one Brahmam to enable them to participate in the award enquiry and to direct respondents 1 to 4 not to disburse the compensation amount to respondents 5 to 9, in respect of agricultural land in Ac.3.67 cents in Sy.No.992/2A Polavaram Village and Mandal, West Godavari District, which was acquired under the provisions of the Act. In the acquisition notification, the name of the petitioner was not reflected though he claimed to be the owner of the lands. He, thereupon, submitted a representation on 04-03-2005 claiming title to land in question and seeking compensation for its acquisition. There being no response to the said representation, the ...
Rajendranagar Residents Welfare Association, Represented by Its Secret ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)ALT669
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. While admitting the civil revision petition on 07.11.2008 in C.R.P.M.P. No. 5882 of 2008 interim stay as prayed for had been granted. C.R.P.M.P. No. 7856 of 2008 is filed to vacate the interim stay granted by this Court in C.R.P.M.P. No. 5882 of 2008 by vacate stay petitioner-respondent No. 2.2. Sri N. Ranga Reddy, learned Standing Counsel representing Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, the first respondent in the civil revision petition, entered appearance on behalf of the first respondent. Though the matter is appearing under the caption 'Interlocutory', at the request of the counsel Sri P.R. Prasad, learned counsel representing petitioner and Sri N. Ranga Reddy, learned Standing Counsel representing R-1 in the civil revision petition and Sri Suryanarayana, learned Senior Counsel representing the vacate petitioner-R2 in the civil revision petition, the civil revision petition itself is being disposed of finally.3. This civil revision petition is preferred b...
Mirza NaseeruddIn Baig and anr. Vs. Smt. Sajida Sultana and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)ALT411
ORDERT. Meena Kumari, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the docket order dated 23rd April 2008 passed in I.A. No. 1657 of 2007 in I.A. No. 1549 of 2007 in O.S. No. 5122 of 2007 passed by VIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, wherein the request of the petitioners therein to view the D.V.D. was allowed.2. The revision petitioners are the defendants and the respondents herein are the plaintiffs in the suit.3. The respondents herein, who are plaintiffs, filed impugned I.A. No. 1657 of 2007 in O.S. No. 5122 of 2007 under Order 17 Rule 14 and Section 151 CPC requesting the court to receive the D.V.D. as additional evidence in the petition. The revision petitioners, who are defendants, resisted the said application contending that nothing was explained as to who prepared, when prepared and with the help of whom and how the said D.V.D is prepared and how it is useful in the evidence and therefore prayed to dismiss the same. The trial court by a docket order al...
Suthraya Prasada Rao Vs. Bogathi Jaya Rami Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2009
Reported in: AIR2009AP509
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 29-09-2008 in I.A. No. 321 of 2008 in O.S. No. 85 of 2005 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Gooty.2. The defendant is the Revision Petitioner. The plaintiff/respondent herein filed the suit for recovery of money. The defendant in his written statement while contending that he had paid some amounts, produced Ex.B-1 calculation memo of the year 1996 which was allegedly signed by the plaintiff. However the plaintiff denied the calculation memo as well as his alleged signatures on the said document. In the circumstances the defendant/revision petitioner filed I.A. No. 481 of 2007 to send Ex.B-1 for opinion of the Hand Writing expert along with the admitted signatures of the plaintiff on the vakalat, plaint and deposition. The said I.A was allowed and Ex.B-1 was sent to the FSL for comparison along with the specimen signatures of the plaintiff, which were taken in the Court. However, FSL declined t...
Siddhardha Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Rep. by Ge ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)ALT440
ORDERNooty Ramamohana Rao, J.1. This Application has been moved under Sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (henceforth referred to as 'the Act'), seeking intervention for appointment and constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal for resolving the disputes that are, said to have, arisen between the parties.2. The Applicant Company responded to the tender notification floated by the respondent Railways on 29-07-2002 for the work relating to 'supply and stacking of 50 mm gauge hard durable stone ballast'. The tenders were opened on 04-09-2002 and the Applicant Company was awarded the work through a communication of acceptance of its tender on 31-10-2002, by the respondents. The Applicant Company was required to supply and stack 9900 cum of the hard ballast @ Rs. 492 per cubic metre and thus, the total value of the contract has been worked out to be Rs. 48,70,800/-. According to the Applicant Company it started undertaking the execution of the work of co...
Chalimeda Lakshmi Narasimha Rao Vs. Chennadi Sudhakar Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2009
Reported in: AIR2009AP117; 2009(4)ALT164
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. Election to the 20 - Karimnagar Local Authorities Constituency, for the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Council, was held on 17-3-2007. The petitioner, first respondent and the second respondent contested the election. While the petitioner contested as a candidate of the Indian National Congress, the first respondent contested as a candidate of the Telugu Desam Party. The first respondent was declared to be the returned candidate. This petition is filed to declare the first respondent's election, as a returned candidate for the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Council from 20-Karimnagar Local Authorities Constituency, as void and illegal on the ground that he suffered disqualification under Section 9-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short - 'the Act').Pleadings:2. A notification was issued, for conducting elections to the 20-Karimnagar Local Authorities Constituency, on 15-2-2007. The last date for filing nominations was 22-2-2007. The nominations...
Nagunuri Srinivas and anr. Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ2499
ORDERGopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. Petitioners herein were tried as accused Nos. 1 and 2 by the IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Warangal in C.C. No. 666 of 1997 for the offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC and under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Before the trial Court the prosecution examined the wife of the first petitioner as P.W.1, the parents of P.W.1 as P.Ws.2 and 3, the brother of P.W.1 as P.W.4 and some other witnesses as P.Ws.5 to 8. Having considered the entire evidence, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the petitioners are guilty of the said offences and accordingly convicted the petitioners for the said offences. However, as P.W.1 came forward and filed an affidavit before the trial Court stating that the matter was settled by the elders and that she was living with her husband i.e. the first petitioner herein, the trial Court, instead of sentencing them for the offences, for which they were convicted, took a lenient view and applied the ...
Voltas Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner (Ct) Ltu, Secunderabad Divis ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-11-2009
Reported in: (2009)25VST53(AP)
ORDERT. Meena Kumar, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the notice dated January 16, 2009 issued by the second respondent in CCT's Ref. No. LV(l)/745/2008 rejecting the request for deferment of revision proceedings under Section 20(6) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to restrain him from taking any action pursuant to the said notice, pending disposal of W. P. No. 25227 and batch.2. The brief facts of the case are that against the orders of the 1st respondent for assessment year 2001-02, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and the said Appellate Deputy Commissioner by his order dated November 14, 2006 remanded the matter to the first respondent. While so, the second respondent issued revision show-cause notice dated November 19,2008 proposing to revise the orders of the assessing authority as well as the appellate authority. When similar revisions were made by second respond...
Sri Vasantha Venugopala Swamy Vari Temple Rep. by Its Chairman Nuvvula ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)ALT743
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Sri Vasantha Venu Gopala Swamy Vari Temple, Gottumukkala village, Kanchikacherla Mandal, Krishna District, represented by its Chairman had preferred C.M.A. No. 717 of 2008 as against an order made in I.A. No. 284 of 2008 in O.S. No. 101 of 2008 on the file of the Vacation Civil Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam (In the court of the Junior Civil Judge, Nandigama).2. Likewise, C.M.A. No. 718 of 2008 is preferred by the self same Temple (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Temple' for the purpose of convenience) as against an order made in I.A. No. 285 of 2008 in O.S. No. 102 of 2008 on the file of the Vacation Civil Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam (In the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Nandigama).3. Respondents/petitioners/plaintiffs in both these matters being Mukkapati Venkateswara Rao and Seelamneni Venkateswara Rao though different, since similar questions are involved in both these civil miscellaneous appeals, for the purpose of convenience, these civil misc...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »