Andhra Pradesh Court April 2009 Judgments

P. Yagna Narayana Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Its Secretary t ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(4)ALT589

ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order dated 26.03.2009 passed in O.A. No. 3952 of 2009 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and the transfer order issued by the first respondent vide G.O.Rt. No. 382 dated 02.03.2009 and for quashing the same. 2. The petitioner, who is working as Sub-Registrar Grade-I at Patamata of Vijayawada, Krishna District, has been transferred and posted to the place of the sixth respondent at Kavutaram, Machilipatnam vide G.O.Rt. No. 382 dated 02.03.2009 issued by the first respondent in relaxation of ban on transfer of employees. Challenging the same, he filed O.A. No. 3952 of 2009, but the same was dismissed on the ground that as G.O.Rt. No. 382, dated 02.03.2009, whereby the petitioner was transferred, was issued after following due procedure, there is no illegality or irregularity in the said order. Aggrieved by the same, he filed the present writ...

K. Bhaya Reddy and ors. Vs. Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Kad ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(3)ALT401

ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. Save the petitioner in W.P. No. 7197 of 2009, the petitioners in all other writ petitions are A4-licence holders, and they having been granted the lease of right to sell liquor by shop for the lease years 2008-10 by the Government, are doing business of selling liquor by shop. While so, the Superintendent of Prohibition and Excise, issued notices calling upon the petitioner-A4 licence holders (except the petitioners in W.P. Nos. 6662 and 7050 of 2009) to show cause as to why their A4 licences should not be suspended under Section 31(1)(b) of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for violating the A.P. Excise (Lease of Right of Selling by Shop and Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules').2. The petitioner-A4 licencees after submitting their explanations, filed writ petitions questioning the show cause notices issued to them by the Superintendent of Prohibition and Excise. While the writ petitions filed ...

M. Satyanarayana @ Pedda Raju Vs. Katama Raju and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(6)ALT93

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. C.R.P. No. 614 of 2009 is filed by the revision petitioner-defendant being aggrieved upon an order dated 20-11-2008 made in I.A. No. 583 of 2008 in O.S. No. 416 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Adoni. Likewise C.R.P. No. 717 of 2009 is filed by the self same revision petitioner-defendant being aggrieved upon an order dated 20-11-2008 made in I.A. No. 582 of 2008 in O.S. No. 399 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Adoni.2. Heard Sri K. Sitaram, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner and Sri R.V. Nagabhushana Rao representing Sri R.V. Prasad, learned Counsel representing the respondent, in both the C.R.Ps.3. Sri K. Sitaram, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner-defendant in both the C.R.Ps, would maintain that the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Adoni totally erred in making the aforesaid orders, since there is no provision in the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') which e...

T. Vishwanadham and ors. Vs. Commissioner (Registrations and Stamps) a ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(6)ALT220

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Kadem Beeraiah, alias Beerappa, the 5th respondent herein, is said to have executed a General Power of Attorney for consideration, in favour of the petitioners herein, and one, Mr. P. Bal Reddy, on 15-09-1995. It is stated that the Sub-Registrar, Bibinagar, the 4th respondent herein, cancelled the GPA through a document dated 08-07-2008; and together with respondents 6 to 8, the 5th respondent entered into an Agreement of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney, in favour of respondents 9 to 12. On 15-07-2008, the petitioners complain that the 4th respondent herein ought not to have registered the deed of cancellation.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.3. A registered GPA was executed in favour of the petitioners and one, Mr. Bal Reddy, on 15-09-1995, by the 5th respondent. 12 years thereafter, the GPA was cancelled. It may be true that a GPA, coupled with interest, cannot be cancelled unilaterally. For ...

Gotety Phanindra Vs. Durga Prasad Rao and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

D. Appa Rao, President: Oral: 1. This is a petition filed under Section 27 of Consumer Protection against respondents to sentence them with imprisonment as well as impose fine for non-compliance of order of this Commission in C.D. 80/1997 dated 21.4.2006. 2. It is averred in the petition that he filed a complaint against the respondents pertaining to an agreement of sale dated 30.6.1992, for compensation and damages. By order dated 23.11.2001 this Commission directed the respondents to pay Rs. 6 lakh with interest @ 18% p.a., from 30.6.1992 till the date of payment together with costs of Rs. 5,000. Aggrieved by the said order R2 to R6 preferred F.A. No. 36/2002 before the National Commission which in turn dismissed it by order dated 12.4.2002. Thus the orders passed against R2 to R6 are confirmed. R1 preferred F.A. 806/2003 before the National Commission and the same was remanded for fresh consideration. on merits against R1 only. By order dated 21.4.2006 this Commission after consider...

N. Sreenivasulu Vs. N. Prakash Reddy and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(4)ALT543

ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 7.1.2009 in E.A. No. 458 of 2008 in E.A. No. 533 of 2005 in E.P. No. 135 of 2004 in O.S. No. 40 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Anantapur. 2. O.S. No. 40 of 2002 was filed by the 1st respondent herein for recovery of money allegedly due from the 2nd respondent herein under a promissory note dated 7.6.2001. The said suit was decreed on 8.4.2003 and pursuant thereto E.P. No. 135 of 2004 was filed for realization of the decretal amount by sale of the properties shown in the E.P. Schedule. While so, the Revision Petitioner filed E.A. No. 533 of 2005 claiming title to Item No. II of the E.P. Schedule property on the basis of a Registered Will dated 22.6.1998 executed by his mother Smt. N. Ramakka. It is claimed by him that the said property originally belonged to his deceased father by name N. Muniratnam, who expired on 15.4.1980. During his lifetime, he executed an Un...

Lingamdinne Rama Reddy Vs. Vongole Venkatarami Reddy

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(5)ALT659

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The respondent herein filed O.S. No. 50 of 2003 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, against the petitioner herein, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/-. The petitioner filed written statement and the trial Court framed the issues. The trial of the suit commenced, and during the course of his evidence as PW.1, the respondent filed a document marked as Ex.A.1. One person, by name Neelam Pulla Reddy, figured as attestor of Ex.A.1. The respondent proposed to examine Pulla Reddy as PW.2, and in fact, an affidavit in lieu of chief examination was also filed by the witness. However, suspecting bona fides of the said witness and alleging that Pulla Reddy colluded with the petitioner, the respondent filed a memo, before the trial Court, with a prayer to eschew the evidence of that witness.2. The petitioner filed I.A. No. 1165 of 2007, with a prayer to summon the said Pulla Reddy for being cross-examined by him. The respondent opposed the application. ...

Margadarshini Educational Society, Rep. by Its Secretary, Mr. Ravi Ana ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(4)ALT727

K.C. Bhanu, J.1. This second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree, dated 01- 09-2008, made in A.S. No. 29 of 2006, on the file of the Special Judge for Trial of Offences under SC/ST (POA) Act-cum-V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, in setting aside the judgment and decree, dated 10-03-2006, in O.S. No. 400 of 2003, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sangareddy, wherein the suit filed by the plaintiff for grant of perpetual injunction was decreed.2. For better appreciation, the parties hereinafter will be referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.3. The averments of the plaint in brief, are as follows:The plaintiff is a registered Society under the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001 (for brevity 'the Act'). The aims and objects of the society is to provide good education and basic knowledge in the vicinity of Ramachandrapur. The society was incorporated and registered by seven members including the President, Vice- President e...

Penna Cement Industries Ltd. Rep. by Its Managing Director, Sri P. Pra ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(5)ALT356

ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J. 1. The petitioner, a cement manufacturing company, seeks to have Clause 14 of G.O.Ms. No. 117 dated 17.03.1993 declared as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction or in the alternative for a declaration that Clause 14 of the said G.O. is applicable only to industries set up on or after 03.10.1992 and that G.O.Ms. No. 117 dated 17.03.1993 has no application to the petitioner - industry. Petitioner seeks a further declaration that the order of the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Anantapur, in so far as he had restricted the power tariff rebate to Rs. 50.00 lakhs, was illegal and without jurisdiction. Petitioner also seeks to have the order of the Government dated 21.06.1995 declared as illegal, without jurisdiction, inoperative and violative of G.O.Ms. No. 654 dated 13.07.1976, for a direction to the respondents to extend the benefit of power rebate at 25% on the aggregate power bills of the petitioner company for the initial period of three y...

Sri Venugopala Swamy Vari Devasthanam Vs. Assistant Commissioner of En ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(15)ALT574

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner challenges the proceedings, dated 29.04.2004, issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kothavalasa, the 2nd respondent herein.2. The facts, that gave rise to the filing of the writ petition, are as under:The petitioner-Temple held various extents of land in different survey numbers of Kothavalasa. One such item is, the land in survey No. 7, admeasuring Acs.15.04 cents. The Government initiated action for acquisition of the said land to provide house sites to the flood victims of Veerasagaram Tank of Kothavalasa Village. The Commissioner of Endowments gave consent for acquisition. When the proposals were in progress, the 3rd respondent filed W.P. No. 35480 of 1998, before this Court, claiming that he is entitled to be paid the compensation. The writ petition was dismissed on 16.04.2003, leaving it open to the 3rd respondent to file a suit.3. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent filed Rev.W.P.M.P. No. 9610 of 2003. An order, dated 06.01.2004, was passe...