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.
M/S. King Fisher Airlines Ltd Vs. Mr. B.V. Krishna Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2010
Oral Order (Per Smt. M. Shreesha, Honble Member) 1. Aggrieved by the order of the District Consumer Forum, West Godavari District at Eluru, dated 30.06.2007 in CC.No.144/2006, opposite party No.1 preferred this appeal. 2. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are he scheduled to travel from Vijayawada to Chennai to Cochin and Cochin to Chennai on 16.6.2006 and 18-6-2006 respectively along with others. Accordingly he reserved 3 and 6 Air tickets through opposite party No.2 on 12-6-2006 by paying air fare. The complainant alleged that the scheduled flights were rescheduled and ultimately cancelled on the respective dates without prior information. He further alleged that due to sudden cancellation, they felt much inconvenience. The complainant submitted that on 30.8.2006 he booked two tickets one for him and another for his wife to travel from Kolkata to Hyderabad on 31-8-2006 and accordingly they reached Air Deccan Office and attended for screening process. The complainant allege...
Mathrusree Educational Society Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and ors ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2010
This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in grating permission to respondent No.4, vide proceedings dated 11.08.2004, for starting a new private unaided degree college as illegal and without jurisdiction. At the hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education and learned counsel representing standing counsel for respondent No.3 University are present. The learned counsel for respondent No.3 submitted a bunch of papers with counter on behalf of counsel for respondent No.2.The petitioner is an educational society which has established Manjira Vidyalayam wherein it is running classes 1 to 10 at Ramayampet village, Nalgonda District. It has pleaded that intending to start a degree college in Ramayampet it was awaiting notification in that regard to be issued by respondent No.2. It has further averred that it has learnt that respondent No.4 has made an application for grant of permission...
K.Rajendra Kumar Vs. Deccan Grameena Bank
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2010
The petitioner was working as an officer in the Deccan Grameena Bank, the 1st respondent herein, in MMGS-II category, in the year 2005. A memo dated 27.08.2005 was served upon him alleging that he resorted to certain irregularities in the matter of extending the benefit of crop insurance to the borrowers from the Bank. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 30.09.2005. Not being satisfied with that, the 1st respondent issued a charge memo dated 19.11.2005 framing two charges. The petitioner submitted his explanation dated 10.12.2005. The 1st respondent appointed an inquiry officer. The enquiry officer submitted a report dated 15.12.2006 holding that the Charge No.1 is proved and that Charge No.2 is not proved. The disciplinary authority issued a memo dated 03.03.2007 to the petitioner stating that he has differed with the finding of the inquiry officer on Charge No.2 and directed the petitioner to give explanation as to why, the punishment of compulsory retirement from Bank's ser...
Forum for Sustainable Development Vs.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-2010
1. Claiming to espouse public interest, the environmental clearance accorded by the Ministry of Environment and Forests New Delhi (Respondent 1) vide F.No.J- 13011/36/2008-IA.II(T), permitting Respondent 4 to set up "2640 Megawatts (4 x 660 MW) Thermal Power Project at Village Srikakulam, District Kakarpalli Andhra Pradesh, (clearance for short) is sought to be set at naught by the writ petitioners on the ground of alleged violence with the ecology and the relief so prayed for is founded on the assertion that the entire area, earmarked for the project site is the Forest and swamp land which is refuted by the respondents giving rise to several questions of fact which will be analyzed a bit later. At the outset we would like to address the preliminary objections, raised by Mr.P.P. Rao learned senior Advocate appearing for the respondent 4, at the very beginning of his arguments, one being that the writ petition is liable to dismissal because petitioner is not competent to file the writ p...
B. E. Co-operative Bank Vs. Tulluri Rama Krishna Rao and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2010
(As per Sri Syed Abdullah, Honble Member) The appellant is the opposite party in CC 24/2007 before the District Forum I, Krishna at Machilipatnam, where under, the opposite party was directed to credit an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the S. O. D. Account, bearing No. 251 of the complainant and also to pay compensation of Rs. 5000/- with costs of Rs.1000/-. The impugned order is assailed as erroneous both on questions of fact ad law. The facts of the case are that the complainant had opened an S.O.D. Account bearing No. 150 with the opposite party bank and used to operate it. But it was closed on 26.09.2006. Subsequently, he opened a new account bearing no. 251 with the opposite party on 07.10.2006. The opposite party had sent a letter dated 16.03.2007 informing that a sum of Rs.5000/- was wrongly credited to his old Account bearing no. 150 and another customer of their bank, by name, A. Ramakrishna Rao bearing SOD Account No 159 had produced a counterfoil dated 08.12.2005 for Rs.5,000/- co...
Venkateshwara Sarma and Others Vs. M/S. Surya Estates and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2010
Oral Order :(Per Smt. M. Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.107/2006 on the file of District Forum-I, Hyderabad, the complainants preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainants are the owners of flats in Surya Residency Apartment, Mylargadda, Secunderabad and the said apartment was constructed by opposite party no.2 who is the Managing Director of the Construction firm M/s.Surya Estates i.e. opposite party no.1. Opposite party no.2 entered into Agreements for the sale of flats with the complainants in the month of July,2002 and handed over the flats under the registered sale deeds in the year 2003 with some unfinished works and promised to complete the unfinished works within one or two months. The complainant made personal visits to the office of opposite party and requested to complete the works which were left unfinished but there is no response from the opposite party. The following are the unfinished works and d...
A.Sridhar Lakshman Vs. M/S.Merbanc Financial Services Ltd. Rep. by Off ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2010
1.This application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been taken out by Sri A.Sridhar Lakshman to set aside the award dated 27.6.2001 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal comprising Justice A.Gopala Rao, Justice T.N.C.Rangarajan, former Judges of this Court, and G.Manohar, Advocate. 2.Background facts, in a nutshell, leading to reference of the dispute to the Arbitral Tribunal are:-M/s.Merbanc Financial Services Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the company") is absolute owner of 1853.80 square yards in Plot No.7, Sector 1, HUDA Techno Enclave in Sy. No.64 of Madhapur village, Sherilingampally, Ranga Reddy District. The applicant approached the company for development of the said plot into a multi-storied building complex. They entered into a development agreement-cum-General Power of Attorney on 6.1.1999 (for brevity, "agreement"). Under the said agreement, the applicant was authorized to construct a multi- storied building complex on the said plot. The c...
Pulavarthy Ankaraju and ors. Vs. the Special Chief Secretary to Govt.,
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2010
1. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are 13 in number, seeking mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 5 in granting licence to dig fish tanks in an extent of Ac.239.25 cents comprising R.S.Nos.72, 69/1, 71/1, 71/2, 30, 32, 33, 38, 39, 40, 35, 44/1, 55/2, 51/2, 63/1A, 55/5A, 56/1B, 52/4, 5, 64/1A, 46/2, 3, 4, 49/1, 2, 50/3, 51/2, 52/6, 53/2, 55/1, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 70/1, 225/2, 226/2A, 2B, 227/2A, 2B, 2C, 228/1A, 1B, 2, 3, 232/1A, 232/2, 3, 232/2, 43/3B, 65/2, 65/2, 65/2, 65/2, 250, 251/6, 251/8 and 251/9 of Gogunta, Vasanthawada Villages, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District, is illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and contrary to G.O.Ms.No.83, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development Fisheries (F.II) Department, dated 12.09.2007 and G.O.Ms.No.18, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development Fisheries (F.II) Department, dated 26.03.2008 and consequently cancel...
Mmtc Ltd. Vs. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2010
1.This Arbitration Application has been taken out under Section 11 (5) & (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, "the Act") read with Scheme for Appointment of Arbitrators, 2006, seeking for constitution of a panel of three arbitrators in terms of Clause 13.2.2 of the agreement dated 06.02.2004 for adjudicating the disputes between the parties. 2.The case of the applicant, in brief, is as follows: MMTC-the applicant entered into an agreement No.PUR 3.66.043/007, dated 06.02.2004 with Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited-the respondent for sale of Low Ash Metallurgical (LAM) Coke. The applicant sold 2,39,951 M.Ts. of LAM Coke to the respondent between October, 2004 and August, 2006. Clause 7 of the agreement deals with the charges and payments. The price consists of two components viz., variable cost of Rs.5856 + fixed conversion cost including a margin @ Rs.1244/-, thus making it a total ofRs.7,100/- per M.T. Some disputes cropped up between the parties with regard to co...
Smt. Burra Anitha Vs. Elagari Mallavva and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-2010
1.The docket order, dated 03-02-2010 in I.A.No.383 of 2009 in O.S.No.103 of 2009 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge's Court, Siddipet, led the plaintiff to approach this Court with this Revision. 2. While dealing with the petition for temporary injunction, the objection of the plaintiff against marking a simple sale deed on the ground of insufficiency of stamp duty and want of registration was ruled out by the trial Court by the impugned order. Referring to three precedents from this Court, the trial Court was of the opinion that it is not open to the plaintiff to insist upon the Court to undertake an independent enquiry into the admissibility of the document at the interlocutory stage to pronounce upon the said document once for all. While recognizing the right of the plaintiff to take an objection if there is a legal infirmity or illegality, the trial Court opined that a document, which is not stamped or registered, can be marked in the interlocutory applications and the...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »