Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.
Riviera Apartments Owners Association Vs. M/S. Bhavanam Estates Privat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2010
(As per Sri Syed Abdullah, Honble Member) Alleging deficiency in service against the opposite parties 1 to 3, i.e. the builder-cum-the developers, this complaint is filed seeking directions to renovate the defects in the construction made in their flats, also to pay compensation of Rs.26,60,000/- to make good the deficiencies, so also, to pay costs of Rs.20,000/-. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that all the 27 Flat owners have formed themselves as an Association in respect of flats of developed by M/s. Bhavanam Estates Private Limited (OP 1). All the owners have undivided share of land of 50 sq. yds each. All the owners after forming as registered association, they elected the second opposite party as its President in the year 2000 who continued up to 2005. That on 19.02.2005, one P. M. Nair was elected as President of the association. In the meeting held on 30.12.002, the executive body had discussed about the inconvenience faced by them in respect of basic amenities such as...
Obulapuram Janardhana Reddy. Vs. Obulapuram Venkata Subba Reddy.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2010
The unsuccessful plaintiff has filed this appeal aggrieved by the dismissal of his suit for specific performance. Brief facts are as follows: For the convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the suit. The defendant is the elder brother of the plaintiff. An agricultural land of an extent of Ac.2.25 cents, out of a total extent of Ac.7.71 cents from Sy.Nos.576/1 and 576/4 in Ellareddipalle Village, Kamalapuram Mandal, Kadapa District, was agreed to be sold by the defendant to the plaintiff under an agreement of sale, Ex.A.1, dated 31.08.1991, which is in telugu, and the terms thereof which are not in controversy are as follows: The total consideration for the said sale was Rs.1,40,000/- and the plaintiff paid a sum of Rs.40,000/- on the date of Ex.A.1 i.e. on 31.08.1991. The rest of the amount of Rs.1.00 lakh was payable in two instalments of Rs.50,000/- each on or before 20.02.1992 and on or before 31.08.1992 respectively. The agreement also provided that in the e...
Obulapuram Janardhana Reddy. Vs. Obulapuram Venkata Subba Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2010
1. The unsuccessful plaintiff has filed this appeal aggrieved by the dismissal of his suit for specific performance.Brief facts are as follows:For the convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the suit. The defendant is the elder brother of the plaintiff. An agricultural land of an extent of Ac.2.25 cents, out of a total extent of Ac.7.71 cents from Sy.Nos.576/1 and 576/4 in Ellareddipalle Village, Kamalapuram Mandal, Kadapa District, was agreed to be sold by the defendant to the plaintiff under an agreement of sale, Ex.A.1, dated 31.08.1991, which is in telugu, and the terms thereof which are not in controversy are as follows: The total consideration for the said sale was Rs.1,40,000/- and the plaintiff paid a sum of Rs.40,000/- on the date of Ex.A.1 i.e. on 31.08.1991. The rest of the amount of Rs.1.00 lakh was payable in two instalments of Rs.50,000/- each on or before 20.02.1992 and on or before 31.08.1992 respectively. The agreement also provided that in the ...
Kamidi Surya Prabhavathi Vs. Kamidi Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Murthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2010
As these two matters arise out of the judgment dated 23.05.2003 delivered in C.C. No. 290 of 1999 and the accused in these two cases are one and the same, they are taken up together for disposal by this common judgment.The learned III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry, vide his judgment dated 23.05.2003, acquitted A1 to A4 of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 506(2) IPC. Aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused, the State preferred Crl.A. No.559 of 2006, while the de facto complainant preferred Crl.R.C. No. 926 of 2007.The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 05.02.1992, in Thokada village, the marriage of PW1 - de facto complainant with A1 was performed. A2 and A3 are the parents of A1. At the time of the marriage, the father of PW1 gave 30 sovereigns of gold, Rs.25,000/- towards purchase of Scooter and Rs.60,000/- for purchasing furniture and also agreed to give Ac.06.30 cents of land to A1 towards Pasupukunkuma. For three years, the acc...
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Bhoomi Reddy Peddi Reddy Laksh ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-16-2010
These two appeals arise out of the award, dated 03.05.2005 passed by the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Kadapa at Proddatur in O.P.No. 438 of 2002.M.A.C.M.A.No.3600 of 2005 is filed by the Oriental Insurance Company, Proddatur, Kadapa District, which was figured as 4th respondent before the Tribunal below. Whereas M.A.C.M.A.No.1422 of 2006 is filed by the National Insurance Company, Secunderabad, which was figured as second respondent before the Tribunal below.Since both the appeals arise out of the award in relation to one and the same accident and common questions of law and fact would arise for consideration, they are being disposed of by the following common judgment.The brief facts necessary for disposing of two appeals may be stated as follows:The respondents 1 to 5 hereinafter referred as claimants filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,0000/- on account of the death of B.P. De...
Modala Ranganayakulu Vs. the Chief Manager
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2010
(As per Sri Syed Abdullah, Honble Member) The unsuccessful complainant in C D 212/2006 before the District Forum, Prakasam District at Ongole filed this appeal challenging the order for dismissal of the complaint. The facts of the case are that the complainant had taken loan from the opposite party and since it was not paid the opposite party filed suit and obtained decree in O. S. 8/81 and then filed EP 44/89 before the Senior Civil Judge, Markapur for recovery of Rs. One lakh. During the pendency of the execution proceedings, i.e., from 16.08.1991 to 03.06.1996. The complainant had paid Rs.54,000/- from time to time and EP was adjourned from time to time for payment of the balance. In the mean while, RBI issued guidelines for one time settlement. So the complainant had approached the opposite party and paid the remaining balance amount of Rs.23,000/- for filing F.S. memo. After payment of the entire amount, the complainant approached the opposite party for returning the title deeds ...
G. Sharadha Vs. Branch Manager, Lic of India, Hyderabad and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2010
(As per Sri Syed Abdullah, Honble Member) Being aggrieved by the order dated 5th July, 2007 passed in C.C 236/2007 dismissing the insurance claim, this appeal is filed questioning the propriety and legality of the order. The facts of the case disclose that the complainants husband had taken an insurance policy from the opposite party in April, 2005 and it expired in August, 2005. when the complainant applied for insurance claim, the opposite party repudiated the same stating that the complainants husband suppressed the facts at the time of applying for the policy. The act or omission on the part of the opposite parties is attributed as deficiency in service. The version of the opposite parties is that the complainants husband had undergone major surgery in the year 1997 for his ailment for Low Back Pain in Apollo Hospitals and subsequently in the year 2005 he obtained an insurance policy by suppressing about his health and surgery. Within four months after obtaining the policy, he exp...
United India Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Thugunta Naga Chandrika
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2010
(As per Sri Syed Abdullah, Honble Member) Being aggrieved by the order passed in C. C. 273/2007 by the District Forum, Prakasam District at Ongole directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.3 lakhs with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of repudiation letter dated 16.05.2007 till the date of realization and directing to reimburse the hostel fee and tuition fee for the period of study subsequent to the death of the deceased in terms and conditions of the policy and with a further direction to pay additional compensation of Rs.1000/- and costs of Rs.1000/-. The impugned order is assailed as erroneous and contrary to the facts and evidence under law. The facts of the case disclose that the complainant had taken a policy under Tailor made PA Scheme for Engineering Student Policy bearing No. 052000/42/000733 dated 25.10.2004. Subsequent to the issuance of the policy, the complainants father died due to snake bite on 08.01.2006. He was taken to RNR Hospital, Santhanuthalapadu for trea...
S. Muralai Prasad Vs. the Authorised Agent
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2010
Oral Order (Per Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) 1. Aggrieved by the order of the District Consumer Forum-II, Hyderabad, dated 05.11.2009 in CC.No.603/2009, the complainant preferred this appeal. 2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he purchased a Nokia Cell Phone Model Number 150 on 26.01.2009 for Rs.1750/- from the opposite party and within four months he found that the phone was not working properly. He complained the same to the opposite partys service centre. The service centre after thorough check up informed that a duplicate battery was found in the cell phone and directed him to approach the seller. The Service Centre also issued a bill for Rs.350/-. On that he approached the seller, who rejected to change the battery. The complainant got issued a legal notice dated 24.05.2009 for which he did not receive any reply from the opposite party. Hence, the complaint seeking direction to the opposite party to exchange the cell phone, besides costs of Rs.2,000/-. 3. The oppos...
M.Jaganath Reddy and Others. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-15-2010
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare G.O.Ms.No.18, Industries & Commerce (INF) Department, dated 4-2-2003, issued by respondent No.1 permitting allotment of land admeasuring Ac.31.605 guntas situated at Ramachandrapuram, Medak District, to respondent No.5, as illegal. The petitioners also sought for a declaration that the failure of respondent No.1 to consider their representation, dated 18-8-2003, for re-conveyance of the land admeasuring Ac.9.38 guntas in Survey Nos.267, 268 and 280 to the petitioners, as illegal.I have heard Sri Ch.Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioners; the learned Government Pleader for Industry representing respondent No.1; and Sri B.P.Mohan, learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 2 and 3.Respondent No.1 acquired huge extents of land for establishment of a factory, buildings, township, schools etc., for Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (for short "the BHEL"). An extent of Ac.30.00 belonging to the father of the petitioners wa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »