Andhra Pradesh Court June 2010 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.
Dr.K.Dhanraju Vs. the State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-2010
1.The petitioner who is a doctor approached this court and filed the present petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.555 of 2007 on the file of the court of the Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class (Prohibition & Excise) Mahaboobnagar, which was taken on file for the offence punishable under section 197 of IPC. 2. Brief facts that led to the filing of the said complaint are as follows: 3. There was an accident on 11.10.2005 and the driver of the crime vehicle involved in the said accident i.e. DCM bearing No.AP 9 U 6386 was the accused. On the basis of a complaint given by P.W.1 in the said case stating that one H.B.Vasudeva Chari, who was examined as P.W.3 in the said case was injured in the accident, a case in Cr.No.85 of 2005 was registered against the said driver for the offence punishable under section 338 of IPC. After investigation, the police filed charge sheet also and the same was taken on file by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of I...
The District Collector and Others Vs. Smt. Ragiri Mamatha
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jun-28-2010
(Typed to the dictation of Smt. M. Shreesha, Honble Member.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.244/2005 on the file of District Forum, Karimnagar, opposite parties preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out are that the complainant had two daughters and one son and intended to go for family planning operation and on 18-11-2004 joined in the camp at PHC, Vemulawada on 18-11-2004 at 3.00 p.m. The resident doctor of PHC Vemulawada, Doctor R.Maheshwar Rao, and two other doctors by name Doctor Penchalaiah and Dr.J.Ramesh attended the camp and operated upon the complainant due to which the complainant became serious within one hour of the operation. The resident doctor called the husband of the complainant and informed him that the complainant was in a serious condition and to shift her to Head Quarters hospital, Karimnagar. Immediately she was shifted and she had gone undergone treatment for a period of 10 days at Karimnagar hospital and the doctor of Karimnagar hospital informed the...
Smt.Supreet Kaur Vs. M/S.Model Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-2010
This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') is filed by the petitioner-A.3 seeking to quash the proceedings against her in C.C.No.31 of 2008 on the file of the XVIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.The case of the complainant-first respondent as per the private complaint filed under section 200 Cr.P.C. is that A.1 being M/s.Software Solutions duly represented by its Partner A.2 availed term loan of Rs.15 lakhs from the Complainant Bank, for which A.3 stood as guarantor agreeing to repay the loan amount in case of default by A.1 and A.2. Thereafter, A.1 and A.2 committed default in payment of instalments and fell due of an amount of Rs.14,51,573/- as on 30.09.2002, which the accused failed to pay in spite of several demands. As such, the complainant approached the Arbitrator i.e. Deputy Registrar of Co- operative Society, Ranga Reddy District East, who passed an award dated 28.01.2004 in case No.18/2004/G for an am...
K.Naga Venkata Surya Lakshmi Vs. the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, R ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-2010
As the subject matter of these three Writ Petitions is common, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, they are being heard and disposed of together. Writ Petition Nos.9925 and 12738 of 2009 have been filed by two individual applicants for LPG Distributorship of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited- respondent No.1 (for short "the Corporation") for Razole and Malkipuram areas respectively in East Godavari District. Writ Petition No.15029 of 2009 has been filed by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.12738 of 2009. THE BACKGROUND FACTS: The Corporation called for applications through notification for appointment of LPG Distributors in Razole and Malkipuram of East Godavari District. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.9925 of 2009 and respondent No.4 therein filed their respective applications for Razole LPG distributorship. The said area is reserved for women. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.12738 of 2009 and respondent No.5 therein applied for the distributorship of Ma...
C. Venkata Sreeramakrishna Rao, S/O SuryanarayanA. Vs. J.L. Narasimha ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
The order passed by the Principal District Judge, Kadapa, dated 01-02- 2007 in S.R.No.18140 of 2006 led the aggrieved plaintiff, whose plaint was rejected at the threshold, to approach this Court with this revision petition. The facts as alleged in the rejected plaint are that the defendant borrowed Rs.10,00,000/- on 03-11-2001 from the plaintiff under the suit promissory note on the even date and issued a post dated cheque dated 20-06- 2003. The post dated cheque when presented for encashment bounced leading to S.T.C.No.80 of 2003 at the instance of the plaintiff against the defendant and the said case was pending, during which substituting the original promissory note filed therein with a certified copy, the original promissory note was taken return for the purpose of filing the suit on the original cause of action of the promissory note. The plaintiff pleaded in the plaint that the time taken between 29-04-2004 and 30-11-2006 in S.T.C.No.80 of 2003 should be excluded from calculatin...
Ghatty Subramanyam Vs. Pathi Venkata Devi Prakash
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
(Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1. The opposite party preferred this appeal against the order of the District Consumer Forum-I Visakhapatnam directing it to pay Rs.12,00,000/- together with interest and costs. 2. The case of the complainant in brief is that the appellant is a builder, who constructed a complex and sold away flat No.38 along with an undivided and unspecified share of 22.65 square yards for a consideration of Rs.3.00 lakhs. Later the building was demolished, as the appellant did not take permission from the Municipal Corporation. Consequently, he suffered loss and claimed a compensation of Rs.12.00 lakhs together with compensation and costs. 3. The opposite party/the appellant herein did not choose to contest the matter before the District Forum and therefore, an exparte order was passed. 4. Now the appellant alleges that he was not having notice of the complaint. In fact it was received by his employee, who did not inform, and therefore, requested the...
Mirza Asghar Hussain, S/O.Mirza Saleem Hussain. Vs. the Commissioner o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
The petitioner's writ petition being W.P.No.24430 of 2009 seeking writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Station House Officer, P.S.Dabeerpura, Hyderabad, in not registering the F.I.R. with regard to petitioner's missing Passport as illegally and arbitrary, was dismissed by the impugned order. The petitioner, therefore, filed instant appeal. There is no dispute that petitioner gave a complaint to second respondent alleging that his Passport has been misplaced at his residence and that he is unable to trace it out. He also requested the second respondent to issue F.I.R. of loss of his original Passport to enable him to apply to third respondent, namely, Regional Passport Officer, Secunderabad, for obtaining duplicate Passport. When second respondent did not issue F.I.R., writ petition was filed.The Passport is of considerable value in the enjoyment of right to move freely as a citizen of the world. In Satwant Singh v A.P.O., New Delhi1, the Supreme Court made the following observa...
Dommeru. Vs. Tallapudi Mandal Kjcjc, and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
1.Heard Sri S. Suryaprakasa Rao, learned counsel representing the revision petitioner-plaintiff. 2)Though respondents-defendants had been served, none represents them. 3)Sri S. Suryaprakasa Rao, learned counsel representing the petitioner-Bank of India, would maintain that the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur had totally erred in reckoning the period of limitation having been confused by the concept of merger, and importing the same while calculating the period of limitation. The learned counsel also would maintain that whether stay application had been moved before the appellate Court along with appeal, whether stay had been granted or not, these aspects would not seriously alter the situation and the period to be reckoned from the date of disposal of the appeal. If the date of appeal decree to be taken into consideration, the final decree application was filed within time. The learned counsel had laid emphasis on Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, (for short 'the Act') on the...
Chatakondu Govinda Rajulu Vs. G. Sudha Madhuri and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
The plaintiff in O.S.No.98 of 1999 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadapa is the appellant. He filed the suit against the respondents for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,81,810/-, with interest at 18% per annum. He pleaded that late G. Pratap Reddy, the husband of the 1st respondent, and father of the respondents 2 to 4 borrowed a sum of Rs.95,000/- on 31-08-1994, and executed a promissory note. It was pleaded that he made a part payment of Rs.500/- on 21-08-1997, and did not pay the balance, by the time he died. The appellant got issued a notice on 18-08-1999 to the respondents, demanding payment. Alleging that the respondents did not pay the amount, he filed the suit. The respondents filed a written statement, denying the very execution of the promissory note, by Pratap Reddy. They have also pleaded that the appellant was himself a tenant in a large commercial complex, owned by their family, and that there was no necessity for the deceased to borrow any amount from the appellant. Re...
Victory Projects and Another Vs. the A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
This Petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Prohibition to the respondent no.1-A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission prohibiting it from exercising the jurisdiction of Judicial First Class Magistrate under section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, in the proceedings in E.A.No.23 of 2009 in CD NO.238 of 1993 on the file of the respondent no.1-the A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission represented by its President, Hyderabad.Brief facts of the case leading to filing of the writ petition are that a Consumer Dispute was raised by the respondents 2 to 14 against the petitioners alleging defect in construction of Flats. Upon consideration of the matter, the 1st respondent-A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, awarded a sum of Rs.2,90,000/- along with compensation of Rs.20,000/- and costs of Rs.3000/- and that they paid a sum of Rs.75,000/- and sought some more time to satisfy the award. However, respondents 2 to 14 have filed E.A.No.23 of 2009 in CD N...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »