Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Chittineni Mohana Rao Vs. Jagarlamudi Subbarao and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2010
The petitioner in I.P.No.6 of 2002, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Parchur, is the appellant herein. He filed the I.P., under Section 10 of the Provincial Insolvency Act (for short 'the Act'), with a prayer to adjudicate him as insolvent. He stated that he became indebted to various persons to the extent of Rs.16,97,422/-, the particulars of which, are furnished in petition 'A' Schedule. In 'B' Schedule thereof, he furnished the particulars of two items of immovable property, and he stated that his share in it is only 1/6th, totalling to Rs.2 lakhs. According to him, his liability exceeded his assets, by about Rs.15 lakhs, and made a prayer that he be declared as insolvent. The I.P was opposed by the respondent Nos.3, 5, 12, 13, 15, 16 and 18, and others remained ex parte. According to them, the loans said to have been borrowed by the appellant are fictitious, and his effort was only to avoid the repayment of genuine debts, which are far below the value of the assets, held by h...
Sri M.Adinarayana and Others. Vs. School Education, Ps Department,secr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2010
Petitioner No.1 is a recognized Buddhist Minority Institution running a high school at Kakinada, East Godavari District. It is an aided institution. For filling up of two unaided posts of SGT and Grade-II Hindi Pandit (one each) petitioner No.1 has advertised in news papers. After going through the selection process, petitioners 2 and 3 were appointed on 16-6-2000 and 27-9-2001 as unaided Grade-II Hindi Pandit and unaided SGT respectively. When the vacancies in the aided posts relating to the said two categories of posts arose, petitioner No.1 has sent proposals to respondent No.1, through competent authority, for absorption of petitioners 2 and 3 in the grant-in-aid posts. As no decision was taken on the said application, the petitioners were constrained to file Writ Petition No.11960 of 2005, which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 8-6-2005 with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and dispose of the proposal of petitioner No.1. As the said order was allegedly violat...
Shankarlal LoyA. Vs. Ramdev Rathi and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2010
The petitioner is a tenant in respect of mulgi, bearing No.15-7-530, Begum Bazar, Hyderabad. It was owned by the deceased-1st respondent. R.C.No.308 of 2005 was filed in the Court of II Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, by the 1st respondent, against the petitioner, for eviction from the schedule premises, pleading the ground of wilful default in payment of rent. During the pendency of the R.C., he died. Respondents 2 to 6, his legal representatives, are brought on record. The 7th respondent became the owner of the premises, by virtue of a gift settlement deed, dated 11.01.2008. He filed I.A.No.303 of 2009, with a prayer to permit him to add paragraph 2(a) to the petition, pleading the ground of wilful default, subsequent to the transfer in his favour. The application was opposed by the petitioner. It was pleaded that, before the 7th respondent came to be impleaded, not only the recording of evidence is concluded, but also the arguments were heard, and the I.A., was filed at a bel...
The Regional Director.Vs. Sri Vasavi Cold Storage Private Limited.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-2010
The respondent is a private limited company and has established a cold storage unit at Nellore. The Inspector of the appellant Corporation visited the cold storage unit on 01.12.1997. He found that eight persons were shown as having been employed. However, he treated the Managing Director and Director of the respondent company also as employees, since they were being paid salary. On that basis, he initiated proceedings to bring the respondent under the purview of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') and accordingly, notices were issued on 23.01.1998, requiring it to pay a contribution of Rs.53,914/- for the period from April 1995 to March 1998. The same was challenged by the respondent before the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Nellore by filing O.P.No.76 of 1998 under Section 75 of the Act. Through its order, dated 28.09.2001, the trial Court allowed the O.P. Hence, this appeal under Section 82 of the Act.Sri B.G.Ravindra Reddy, learned counsel for the appell...
Ganpati Sugar Industries Limited and Another. Vs. the Commissioner and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-26-2010
This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside the proceedings dated 15.05.2006 and the consequential proceedings dated 12.06.2006 of respondent No.1. The petitioners were running a sugar factory in Medak District near Sangareddy. A factory zone was allotted to them by respondent No.1 for a period of five crushing seasons comprising 295 Villages in ten Mandals of Medak District and 98 Villages in four Mandals of Ranga Reddy District on 28.07.1995. Thereafter on 05.02.2000, a fresh factory zone was declared for the seasons 1999-2000 to 2003- 04 by including 393 Villages. By another proceedings dated 01.10.2004, the factory zone was declared for five crushing seasons from 2004-05 onwards, comprising 470 Villages in seventeen Mandals i.e., eleven Mandals of Medak District and six Mandals of Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners obtained a fresh Industrial Entrepreneur Memorandum (IEM) on 06.06.2005. On 02.05.2006, the petitioners made an application to respondent No.1 for declari...
G.Venkat Ratnam. Vs. Smt.Kolli Para Jhansi Lakshmi and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-25-2010
The appellant filed O.S.No.12 of 1998 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Gannavaram, for the relief of perpetual injunction to restrain the respondents herein from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule plot, admeasuring 200 sq. yards. It is stated that his grand-father, by name, Bapayya, constructed two Temples in the Village, and set apart the suit plot, which was purchased through sale deed dated 28-03-1916, for the purpose of constructing a building, for the residence of the Archakas. He pleaded that the respondents, who are having their land on the northern and western portion of the suit plot, tried to encroach upon it, by demolishing a portion of old compound wall separating the properties. The appellant further alleged that when one of his agnates submitted a complaint in the Police Station, it was not received, and on the next day itself, the suit was filed. The 1st respondent herein filed written-statement, and the same was adopted by res...
Ameena Bee and Another. Vs. Ahmedunnisa Begum and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-25-2010
The 1st respondent filed O.S.No.42 of 2003 in the Court of I Additional District Judge, West Godavari, against the petitioners and respondents 2 to 5 for the relief of declaration that she is the owner and possessor of the suit schedule properties and for the relief for perpetual injunction. Decree was also sought for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards the cost of timber said to have been removed from the premises and a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards damages. She based her claim on the plea that her mother was married to the original owner of the property by name Moosa Hajee Abdullah and after his death, her mother succeed to the property. The mother in turn is said to have executed a will in favour of the 1st respondent. The petitioners herein resisted the suit by asserting title in themselves. They placed reliance upon the transactions of gift. The trial of the suit commenced. The evidence on behalf of the 1st respondent was concluded. In the course of their evidence, the petitioners file...
M/S. Maruthi College of Engineering and Technology and Another Vs. the ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-25-2010
1.The accused 1 and 2 filed this revision petition questioning judgment dated 10.02.2010, passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in Crl.A.No.328 of 2008 remanding (?) back C.C.No.278 of 2005 to the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, on two grounds. 2.At the outset, I would like to point out powers of the Appellate Court under Section 386 Cr.P.C. Section 386 Cr.P.C. reads as follows:"After perusing such record and hearing the appellant or his pleader, if he appears, and the Public Prosecutor, if he appears, and in case of an appeal under s 377 or s 378, the accused, if he appears, the Appellate Court may, if it considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, dismiss the appeal, or may- (a) in an appeal from an order of acquittal, reverse such order and direct that further inquiry be made, or that the accused be re-tried or committed for trial, as the case may be, or find him guilty and pass sentence on him according to law; (b) in an ap...
Ms.Sabera Begum. Vs. Chenchalguda, Hyderabad and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
Petitioner's husband-Md.Abdul Quadeer, was found guilty in Sessions Case No.184 of 1991 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, "IPC") and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 (for short, "the Act"), by the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, dated 31.12.1992, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer imprisonment for two months and also to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 27 of the Act and the said judgment has been confirmed by this Court in Crl.A.Nos.76 and 308 of 1993. It is not in dispute that the detenu was working as a police constable during the outbreak of communal violence in Chatrinaka Division. When the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Public Servant is discharging his duties, the detenu killed him stating that 'I have killed, whatever you want to do, do it'...
L. Hariprasad Vs. Lagadapati Suryakumari (Died) Per Lrs and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
1.This appeal is filed under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act (for short 'the Act'), against the order dated 02-01-1990, passed by the Court of District Judge, Nellore, in O.P.No.378 of 1981.2.The 1st respondent is the mother of the 2nd respondent. They filed the O.P., under Section 372 of the Act, for grant of succession certificate in their faour, in respect of the estate of late Lagadapati Satyanarayana Naidu (hereinafter referred to, as 'the deceased'). 3.The brief averments in the O.P. are that Lagadapati Subbaramanaidu and Savitramma had five sons, and the 1st respondent is the wife of one of the sons, Ramanaiah Naidu. The father of the appellant, by name, Kondaiah Naidu is another son. The three other sons, by name Satyanarayana Naidu, Satyarama Prasad, Dasaratharamaiah, remained unmarried, and by the time the O.P was filed, Subbaramanaidu died. 4.The husband of the 1st respondent, Ramanaiah Naidu is said to have left the house, somewhere in the year 1971, and did not re...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »