Andhra Pradesh Court June 2010 Judgments

Bapuji Nagar Residents Welfare Association. Vs. the Ex-officio Cum Rev ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

It is a matter of common knowledge that the Courts are burdened with fairly large number of frivolous litigations. There are certain busy bodies, whose avocation is only to settle scores with others by using the judicial system as the medium. This is one such writ petition. The petitioner is the Bapuju Nagar Residents' Welfare Association. It did not file the copies of bye-laws, nor did it elaborate the nature of activities for the welfare of its members. The respondents 3 and 4 owned a plot of about 600 sq.yards in Kavali Municipality. They submitted an application to the Municipality, seeking permission to construct ground plus two upper floors. Permission was granted. On the basis of the permission, they made construction. The petitioner states that the very permission granted to the respondents 3 and 4 is contrary to G.O.Ms.No.422, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, dated 31-07-1998. Another contention raised by it is that though the permission was, for cons...

Mr.M.Chandra Sekhar Rao and Another. Vs. the Government of Andhra Prad ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

The District Collector, East-Godavari published notification dated 26-09-2006 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act'), proposing to acquire 4 acres of land owned by the petitioners, in Yendapalli Village, of U.Kothapalli Mandal, East-Godavari District, for providing house sites to the weaker sections. The petitioners were under the impression that the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was dispensed with, and accordingly approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.23388 of 2006. That writ petition was disposed of on 10-11-2006, directing that enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act be held. In response to the notices issued under Section 5-A of the Act, the petitioners submitted their objections on 03-10-2006. The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, the 3rd respondent herein, considered the same and submitted his remarks to the 2nd respondent. The latter, in turn issued proceedings dated 13-02-2007, overruling the objectio...

Srinivas Rao, S/O. Govardhan Rao, Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court: Andhra Pradesh

This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is filed by the petitioner to quash proceedings in FIR No.416 of 2008 on the file of the P.S.Shadnagar, Mahbubnagar District. Earlier this petition was dismissed for default / non-prosecution. Now an application has been filed to restore the same. It is always better if the matters are disposed of on merits rather than on technicalities. However, the settled legal position is that whenever an application to set aside the dismissal order is filed, the main case should be heard and disposed of and the matter should not be restored and posted to some other date for further hearing. The Apex Court, in case between Madhumilan Syntex Ltd., and others v. Union of India and another1, observed as follows:-"Normally, when the matter is called out and the advocate is absent, a court may adjourn the matter to next date of hearing. But it may also dismiss the matter for default so as to secure appearance of the advocate. He may apply for restoratio...

Syed Abdul Kareem. Vs.The Commandant, and Others.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the order dated 01.04.2003 in O.A.No.1677 of 2001 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, and memo dated 30.09.1999 issued by the fourth respondent confirming order dated 13.01.1999 passed by the third respondent as illegal and arbitrary. O.A.No.1677 of 2001 was filed by the petitioner against the memo dated 30.09.1999 issued by the fourth respondent confirming the order dated 29.10.1998 passed by the second respondent, and the order dated 13.01.1999 passed by the third respondent, and consequently to quash the above orders.The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Cook in the first respondent battalion on 30.04.1985 and was discharging duties as such. While so, he developed a chronic disease, due to which, he could not attend to duty for the some days. Therefore, the first respondent issued a charge-memo dated 13.02.1998 alleging unauthorized absence at frequent intervals, and the petitioner submitt...

M/S Siva Sai Builders and Developers (P) Ltd Vs. Smt. T. Suvarna

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

(Typed to the dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.1082/2005 on the file of District Forum-I, Hyderabad the complainants preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out are that E.A.No.36/2008 was filed during the pendency of the appeal, F.A.No.1771/2007 and a notice was issued to the J.Dr./opposite party and the opposite party contended that the State Commission passed an order on 22-10-2008 setting aside the order of the District Forum with regard to the relief directing the opposite parties to register the plot and as per the order, it is only liable to pay interest at 18% p.a. on the amount. In the meantime on 31-12-2008 the complainant moved an R.P. before the National Commission and the opposite party filed his objections stating E.A. was filed during the pendency of the appeal and when the relief was set aside, this petition is not maintainable. It was further stated that registration of the plot (flat) constitutes the main relief in t...

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Palla Venkata Ramana and Ot ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

(Typed to the dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.97/2006 on the file of District Forum, Srikakulam, opposite party No.1 preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out are that complainant Smt.P.Kameswari purchased a Tractor cum Trailor AP 30U 2372 with engine No.NCPW 1397 and insured the tractor for Rs.3,35,000/- and trailor for Rs.91,000/- with opposite party no.1 under policy bearing No.433201/200573517 with effect from 28-1-2005 to 27-1-2006. The complainants mother died on 08-11-2005 and the same was informed to opposite party no.1 over phone and under certificate of posting on 23-11-2005 and requested the opposite party No.1 to transfer the policy in favour of the complainant. In the meanwhile the tractor cum trailor met with an accident on 13-1-2005 and it was damaged completely and the complainant informed the same to opposite party No.1 who deputed a surveyor to inspect the vehicle and the accident spot and the complainant was inst...

The Branch Manager and Another Vs. Erothu Tulasamma

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

(Per Honble Sri Justice D.Appa Rao, President) 1. This is an appeal preferred by the opposite parties, the Insurance Company, against the order of the District Consumer Forum, Srikakalum directing them to pay the assured sum together with bonus with interest at 12% per annum from 30.03.2001, the date of death of the assured, till the date of realization, Rs.5,000/- towards compensation and Rs.1,500/- towards litigation expenses and costs. 2. The case of the complainant in brief is that her husband Dharma Rao had taken an insurance policy for Rs.50,000/- commencing from 28.03.2000. While so, on 30.03.2001 he committed suicide. Since it was after expiry of one year, she was entitled to the death benefits together with compensation of Rs.10,000/ and costs. 3. The Insurance Company resisted the case. While admitting the issuance of policy, it alleged that since the life assured died on 30.03.2020 the death will not be covered under the policy, under the terms the death should not occur be...

A. Sudershan Reddy and Others. Vs. A. Jagga Reddy and Others.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2011(NOC)151(AP)

1. This revision is directed against the order dated 24.11.2008 made in I.A.No.601of 2008 in 600 of 2008 in O.S.No.85 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy whereby the petition seeking amendment of the plaint i.e. for inclusion of two items into the plaint schedule was allowed. 2.Brief facts are that the petitioners herein, being the plaintiffs, instituted the said suit seeking partition of the plaint schedule properties mentioned therein against the respondents who are none other than the brothers. The respondents/defendants are contesting the said suit by filing written statement wherein they have taken a plea that some of the joint family properties are not included in the plaint schedule. The issues were settled, evidence on both sides was also closed and the matter was coming up for arguments. At that stage the respondents/defendants filed the present applications requesting the court to reopen the said suit and also for inclusion of the properties...

The Land Acquisition Officer Vs. P.Pulla Reddy and Another.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") by the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupati (Tirupati Rural) is filed questioning the order of the III Additional District Judge, Tirupati dt. 27-3-2001 passed in OP No.111/1998 enhancing the market value from Rs.35,000/- to Rs.55,000/- per acre.An extent of Ac.22-33 cents of land in S.No.355 to 359, 361 and 362 situated at Pudipatla village was acquired for the purpose of formation of a new tank called "Dalavai Cheruvu" in Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District by issuing draft notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Act on 23-6-1990 dispensing with Sec. 5-A enquiry of the Act. Advance possession of the land was taken on 27-3-1980. The Land Acquisition Officer after complying with all necessary formalities passed an award fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.35,000/- per acre being award No.1/91-92A/211/90 dt. 29-2-1992 with all statutory benefits. Dissatisfied wit...

V.Suresh. Vs. the State of A.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

B.CHANDRA KUMAR, J.1. The appellant, in this criminal appeal, has been challenging the judgment dated 01.09.2003 in C.C.No.7 of 2000, passed by the Additional Special Judge for SPE ; ACB - cum V Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as 'Special Judge'), whereby and whereunder, he was convicted and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, ('the Act', for brevity) and further sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d) of the Act. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The appellant herein will be hereinafter referred to as the accused for the sake of convenience.2...