Andhra Pradesh Court March 2010 Judgments

V. Sunitha Devi Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh Through the Secretary ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(3)ALT183

ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. In pursuance of the notification inviting applications for granting dealership/authorization in respect of fair price shop (FPS) of Kandanelly Thanda, H/o. Kandanelly Village, Peddemul Mandal in Ranga Reddy District, dated 03.11.2009, the petitioner applied for being appointed as a FPS dealer, along with respondent Nos. 5 to 7. The third respondent, who is appointing authority, conducted written examination on 20.11.2009. The petitioner was provisionally selected, and the fourth respondent was directed to send antecedents report. The same was submitted on 19.12.2009 to the effect that the petitioner's husband is Government employee working as foreman in Health Department. Therefore, third respondent issued memo dated 29.12.2009 calling upon the petitioner to explain as to why her candidature should not be cancelled. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 2068 of 2010. This Court passed an order in W.P.M.P. No. 2772 of 2010 to the effect that any appoi...

Mohd. Imtiyaz Ahmed Vs. Mohd. HussaIn Khan and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(3)ALT213

B. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. Through this Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act 26 of 1996) (for short, 'the Act'), applicant Mohd. Imtiyaz Ahmed has sought the appointment of arbitrator for settlement of disputes between him and the respondents arising out of the Agreement of Development-cum-General Power of Attorney, dated 19.09.2007.2. Background facts in a nutshell leading to filing of this Arbitration Application are: Respondents Mohd. Hussain Khan and Noor Ahmed Khan are owners of the houses bearing Municipal No. 12-1-566 to 574, totally admeasuring 630 sq. yards. The applicant and the respondents entered into a registered Agreement of Development-cum-General Power of Attorney on 19.09.2007. The applicant had applied to the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation for going ahead with the construction project and obtained sanction on 21.02.2008. A Supplementary Agreement of Development came to be executed between the parties on 18.10.2008 wi...

P. Narayana Reddy and ors. Vs. Govt. of A.P. Rep. by Its Principal Sec ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(3)ALT392

ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. This writ petition is filed in public interest to declare G.O. Rt. No. 1830 Transport, Roads & Buildings (R-1) Department dated 20.12.2008 issued by the 1st respondent entrusting the work of formation of the road, from Mangapatnam to K. Sugumanchipalli Village i.e., K.M 0/0 to KM 30/30 on State Highway No. 31, on nomination basis to the 4th respondent as arbitrary and against public interest.2. Facts, in brief, are that the Galeru Nagari & Sujala Sravanti (GNSS) project envisages drawal of 38.0 tmc of surplus flood waters from the Krishna river to provide irrigation facilities over an extent of 2.60 lakh acres in the drought prone areas of Kadapa (1,55,000 acres), Chittoor (1,03,500 acres) and Nellore (1,500 acres) districts besides meeting the drinking water needs of a population of 10 lakhs. Keeping in view the magnitude of the project it was proposed to take up the works in a phased manner. In March, 2005 the first phase, which involved the works of for...

Variety Dry Fruit Stores Vs. Variety Agencies

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2010(3)ALT151

V.V.S. Rao, J.The Variety dispute in this miscellaneous appeal is between two half blood brothers fighting with full blood for the name 'Variety' to use it as a prefix to the dry fruits business, they do separately. The appellant was unsuccessful in getting a prohibitory order against the respondent and hence this appeal.Background2. The factual background to the extent necessary may be noticed by referring to the parties as they appear before us and while referring to various documents as marked by the Court below. Jamnadas Devji started M/s. Variety Dry Fruit Stores in Secunderabad in 1955 in a rented premises No. 2-4-1, M.G. Road, Secunderabad. He had four sons and four daughters. The respondent (defendant) is one of them. After the death of first wife, Jamnadas married Smt. Jaya Ben. The appellant (plaintiff) is son through second wife. Under Ex.A-9, dated 03.02.1968, elder brother of respondent joined as a partnership business, which was reconstituted as 'Variety Dry Fruit Stores'...

Smt. K. Lakshmi Devamma W/O. Late K. Suresh, Vs. the Regional Manager ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

R. Kantha Rao, J,1. This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the order dated 06.09.2002 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (I Additional District Judge), Kurnool in M.V.O.P. No. 676 of 2000.2. The claimants filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/- on account of the death of one Suresh in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 16.10.1999 near Konduru Cheruvu on the road Pebber-Kollapur, Mahaboobnagar District. The first claimant is the wife and the claimants 2 to 4 are the children of the deceased.3. The claim petition is filed against the Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Kurnool showing as respondent. The learned Tribunal framed the issues, conducted an enquiry into the claim during the course of which the claimants examined PWs.1 to 3 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.5, whereas the respondent examined RW1. However, despite conducting an elaborate enquiry with a view to finally dispose of the claim petition, the...

A. Savithri and Others Vs. the United India Insurance Company Limited ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral order: Syed Abdullah, Member: The revision petitioner is the complainant in CC182/2008 before the District Forum, Kurnool. Aggrieved by the order dated 09.01.2009 passed in IA 393/2008 in CC 182/2008 in dismissing the complaint on the ground that the complaint filed by her is not in consonance with the provisions of Sec. 11 of C P Act for want of territorial jurisdiction. During pendency of the complaint in CC 182/2008, the OP. 3 filed petition Under Section 11 of C P Act. stating that the complainants have mischievously selected the District Forum which lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. The complaint is filed to suit their convenience. As per section 11 of CP Act, the District Forum has no territorial jurisdiction. Admittedly, the Insurance policy was issued by OP. 2 having its office at Alapperzha of Kerala State. The insured had taken the policy under group insurance scheme at Travencore Devoswom Board, Sabarimela , Kerala. While so, the death of the in...

Ravanam Balakrishna Vs. Mudunuri Ramachandra Raju and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order (As per R.Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) These three appeals are preferred by the same opposite party in thre C.Ds, C.D.No.233, 234 and 235 of 2005 and the facts of the case being same in all the three complaints, we propose to dispose of the three appeals by a common order. F.A.No.1656 of 2007 is taken as the leading case. The facts of the case that led to the filing of the appeal are that the complainant therein joined the scheme Sai Laxmi Nagar II floated by the opposite party no.1 in Sy.No.8/1 at Madhurawada where the opposite party no.1 proposed to develop lay out with the approval of VUDA (Visakhapatnam urban Development Authority). The complainant paid Rs.30,000/- in instalments by 4.3.1996 for purchase of plot admeasuring 266 sq.yards. The fourth opposite party issued letter dated 7.10.1995 informing the complainant that the development work of the proposed layout was in progress. The complainant addressed several letters to the opposite party to execute sale deed and...

Kuncha Ramana Kumar Vs. the Branch Manager New India Assurance Company ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral order: Syed Abdullah, Member: The appellant is the unsuccessful complainant in CD 148/2006 before the District Forum, Guntur where under the medi-claim policy sought to be recovered was dismissed. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant had taken a medi claim policy from the OPs in the year 1977 bearing policy no. 621002/48/05/75025 and the policy being renewed every year. During the year 2005 while renewing the policy the assured amount was enhanced to Rs.two lakhs. During the period of the policy i.e. from 18.09.2005 to 17.09.2006, the complainant was affected with ailment, ie., Avascular Necrosis. So the complainant made a preauthorization request to the OPs through TPA TTK Health Care Services Pvt. Ltd requesting them to facilitate cashless settlement to the Apollo Specialty Hospital, Chennai. The complainant was admitted in Apollo hospital on 29.09.2005 at Chennai and undergone surgery on 01.10.2005 under cashless settlement as per the terms and conditio...

Katepally Gangavva Vs. the Branch Manager Shiv Sagar Beedi Works Limit ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral order: Syed Abdullah, Member: The appellant is the unsuccessful complainant in CD 144/2004 before the District Forum, Nizamabad, where under the complainant filed against the OP claiming pensionary benefits under PF Act was dismissed . Questioning the legality and propriety of the order this appeal is filed to direct the respondent to pay the pensionary benefits under PF scheme. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant was a Beedi worker and used to work under the OP1 branch. The complainant is an illiterate so she used to attend to beedi rolling work and she worked from May, 93 to August, 2000. On attaining the age of 58 years, and on the compulsion of OP 1 ceasing her membership she resigned the job of beedi rolling worker. During her employment she was allotted PF No. AP/17070/22297 by the PF authorities. As per rules, in case, the worker completes 58 years the worker is eligible for pension. At the time of submitting the papers opting for the pension schem...

V. Madan Mohan Rao Vs. M/S Narne Estate Pvt Ltd. Rep. by Its Managing ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order: R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member: The appeal is filed by the complainant against the order of the District Forum-I, Hyderabad in C.C.No.686 of 2006 whereby his complaint was dismissed holding that the complainant failed to establish deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant after seeing advertisement of the opposite party purchased the residential plots No.D-32 and 33 Sector IV admeasuring 250 sq.yards each situated at Bibinagar, Ghatkeswar Mandal by paying sale consideration of Rs.15,000/- per each plot. After payment of full amount the complainant demanded for registration of the said plots in his favour but the opposite parties failed to register the same. Even after expression of his willingness to pay the registration charges and stamp duty the opposite parties are not come forward to register the plots. The complainant got issued legal notice dated 8.7.2006 to the opposite parties for which t...