Andhra Pradesh Court August 2009 Judgments

C. Pandit Rao and ors. Vs. Vishwakarma Association (Sangham) and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(6)ALT197

L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The 1st respondent is the Society, registered under the A.P. (Telangana Area) Public Societies Registration Act, 1350 Fasli, (for short 'the Act'), in the year 1965, with the development and welfare of Viswakarma Community in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad, as its objective. It filed O.S. No. 358 of 2000 against the appellants (defendants 1, 3, 4, 6 and 7) and respondents 2 and 3 herein, in the Court of IX Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Hyderabad for the relief of declaration, to the effect that the trust deed dated 16-10-1996 brought into existence in relation to a Kalyana Mandapam is null and void. Consequential relief of injunction, in relation to property bearing No. 3-1-228 to 232, Somasundaram Street, Secunderabad, and Dharmakanthas, was also claimed.2. It the plaint, it was pleaded that the 1st respondent has undertaken several activities to promote its aims and objectives and as part of that activity, an exte...

Zaheda Begum and anr. Vs. Lal Ahmed Khan and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2010AP1; 2009(6)ALT565

L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. Plaintiffs in O.S. No. 13 of 2000 on the file of the VII Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Visakhapatnam, are the appellants. They filed the suit for partition against the respondents, in respect of the schedule property, which is a house at Visakhapatnam.2. One Mr. Ghouse Khan had three brothers i.e. respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and two sisters, the first appellant and late Malika Begum, the mother of the second appellant. Ghouse Khan did not marry and remained as a bachelor. He purchased the suit schedule property through a registered sale deed dated 29-07-1981. After the death of Ghouse Khan, the appellants and the respondents effected a family settlement, through document dated 07-02-1992. According to this, the second appellant was to be given western half of the suit schedule house and the first appellant and respondent Nos. 1 to 3 were to be allotted th share each, in the rest of the property.3. The appellants pleaded that in spite of repeated dema...

Sahasra Estates India Private Limited, Represented by Its Director, Ms ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order: (Per Sri K. Satyanand,Honble Member) This is an appeal filed by the opposite party against which the District Forum passed an order. Even by the time of admission, the complainant/respondent entered appearance through his advocate and also filed counter obviously in the I.A. for stay. In as much as both sides appeared, the matter was taken up for final adjudication and accordingly heard the counsel on both sides. The facts that led to filing this appeal are briefly as follows: Attracted by the real estate project floated by the appellant, the complainant claimed to have invested an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- and odd towards the price of the plot undertaken to be developed by the appellant. Though the complainant had paid the entire amount, the appellant procrastinated to take the deal to its logical conclusion by executing a registered sale deed in respect of the plot in favour of the complainant. During the course of the demands by the complainant evoking reaction of indiffer...

M/S. Anvik Industrial Controls a Registered Partnership Firm Vs. M/S. ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) Appellant is unsuccessful complainant. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that he purchased a vehicle and got it insured with the respondent insurance company for Rs. 4,50,000/- covering the period from 25.4.20001 to 24. 4. 2002. While so on 22. 6. 2001 the car was stolen when he kept the car at his residence located at Karan Centre, Sarojini Devi Road, Secunderabad and on that he gave a report to the police who registered a case in Crime No. 125/2001 Dt. 22. 6. 2001. He informed the same to the insurance company on 26. 6.2001. The police referred the matter as undetected and filed final report before the XXI Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Hyderabad on 27.9.2001, and the case was closed. He gave R.C. book, and keys to the respondent on 1. 10. 2001. Despite several reminders, the insurance company did not settle the claim and finally he got issued a legal notice on 14.3.2002 for which no reply was issued. Therefo...

T.A. Khaja HussaIn Vs. C. Irshad Basha Nizami

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(1)ALT225

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The Civil Revision Petition is coming up for admission.2. Sri K. Sitaram, the learned Counsel representing the respondent having lodged the caveat on behalf of the respondent, having made certain submissions, further made a request for the disposal of the Civil Revision Petition itself at the stage of admission. Sri Dilipkumar Shiradkar, the learned Counsel representing the petitioner also made submissions touching the merits and demerits of the Civil Revision Petition and further made a request for the disposal of the Civil Revision Petition itself. Hence, at the stage of admission, the Civil Revision Petition is being disposed of finally.3. The Civil Revision Petition is filed by the revision petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by an order dated 22-6-2009 made in I.A. No. 231 of 2009 in O.S. No. 52 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Adoni.4. Sri Dilipkumar Shiradkar, the learned Counsel representing the petit...

State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by Its Secretary, Agriculture and Co-oper ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(1)ALT250

ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. State questions the order, dated 14-12-2007, passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A. No. 5423 of 2007, wherein the application filed by the respondent herein for considering his case for promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Agriculture, was allowed.2. Heard both sides. Perused the records.3. The admitted facts are that the respondent herein was appointed as Agricultural Officer and he joined duty on 17-07-1993 in the Wazeedu Mandal, Khammam District and his services were regularized vide proceedings, dated 29-08-1997 and his probation was also declared vide proceedings, dated 27-02-2003. While so, an enquiry was ordered against him for certain irregularities and punishment was imposed vide proceedings, dated 11-12-2001, withholding three annual grade increments with cumulative effect. The imposition of punishment has become final.4. As per G.O.Ms. No. 342, dated 04-08-1997, whenever any Government employee is awarded the penalty o...

Charminar Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd. Vs. Rohit and Associates (Build ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(1)ALT165

C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. These Writ Appeals are filed against common order dated 25-8-2000 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos. 26590, 26591, 26592, 26598 and 26603 of 1999. While Writ Appeal Nos. 1670, 1691 and 1713 of 2000 and 9 of 2001 were filed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies/OSD/Arbitrator (for short 'the Arbitrator'), the other Writ Appeals were filed by the Charminar Co-operative Urban Bank Limited, Hyderabad (for short 'the Bank').2. Respondent No. 1 in each of these appeals is either a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 or a partnership firm registered under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. They are admittedly members of the Bank. Respondent No. 1 in each of these appeals borrowed huge amounts as loans from the Bank and failed to repay the same. Therefore, the Bank approached the Arbitrator with claim statements for passing of awards under Section 61 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 19...

Tata Tele Services Ltd. Rep. by Its President-telecom Mr.Amit Bose and ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President .) This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties-teleservice providers against which the District Forum passed an order making them jointly and severally liable to revise the bills and statements marked as Exs.A6, A7 and A8 and issue fresh bills to the complainant. The complainant should pay the amount accordingly and then the opposite parties should reconnect the mobile connection and the opposite parties were further directed to pay Rs.3,000/- towards compensation and Rs.1,000/- towards cots. The brief facts of the appeal as gleaned from the pleadings, evidence and arguments are as under: The complainant/respondent obtained a mobile connection from the opposite parties which represent the one teleservice provider in two levels w.e.f. 26-9-2001. He claimed to have continuously paid the subscription charges, bill charges etc. promptly. Gradually he began to suspect the correctness of the bills. So he time and again protested ...

Chief Engineer, Construction, South Central Railway and anr. Vs. M.V.V ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(1)ALT383

T. Meena Kumari, J.1. This appeal is directed against the decree and order dated 28.6.2002 in O.P. No. 549 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional Special Judge for SPE & ACB cases-cum-V Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.2. The appellants are the petitioners in the O.P. whereas the 1st respondent is the contractor and the 2nd respondent is the arbitrator. The appellants filed the aforementioned O.P. before the lower Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to set aside the Award passed by the 2nd respondent-arbitrator.3. The brief facts of the case that led to the filing of the present appeal, as projected in the O.P. are as follows:The 1st respondent entered into an agreement with the appellants on 19.2.1990 for doubling of track between Thangadi-Chegunta Stations by earth work in formation, construction of major/minor bridges and execution of miscellaneous works from Ch. 39000M to Ch. 43200...

M/S.Shriram Investments Limited, Rep. by their Authorized Representati ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri K. Satyanand, Hon'ble Member .) The facts of this appeal filed by the complainant as gleaned from the pleadings, affidavits and the submissions lie within a very narrow compass. It seems opposite party No.4 was indebted to the complainant. Presumably in discharge of the said debt, opposite party No.4 obtained a D.D.bearing No.753997 dated 20-4-2004 from opposite party No.2 in favour of the complainant payable at opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 are branches at different places of the same Corporation Bank. Opposite party No.3 is a formal party, the Chairman and Managing Director, of the Corporation Bank. In due course the complainant presented the said D.D. for encashment obviously from opposite party No.1 but to his utter disappointment, it seems the bank refused to pay the amount in violation of the provisions of the Negotiable Instrument Act particularly Section 85 (a). Opposite party No.1, however, took the plea that it so stoppe...