Andhra Pradesh Court August 2010 Judgments

R. Rama Krishna Rao S/O. R.L. Ganapathi Rao, and ors. Vs. K. Ramanaiah ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order dated 23.03.2002 passed in Crl.R.P.No.8 of 2001 by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupathi, whereby the learned Sessions Judge set aside the order dated 16.12.2000 passed in C.F.No.3201 of 2000 by the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupathi, directing the Magistrate to restore the complaint lodged by the respondent herein and proceed with the matter in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( for short 'Cr.P.C.'). Brief facts that led to filing of the present revision case are as follows. The first respondent/complainant approached the III Additional Munsif Magistrate by filing a private complaint against the petitioners/accused for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 427, 447 and 448 IPC. The learned Magistrate instead of taking cognizance of the said offences against the accused, referred the matter to the police for investigation as provided for under ...

Union of IndiA. Vs. V.Santhabai and Others.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

The respondents filed O.A.A.No.255 of 1999 before the Secunderabad Bench of Railway Claims Tribunal claiming compensation, on account of the death of V.Chander Naik, husband of the 1st respondent and father of respondents 2 to 5. It was pleaded that Chandu Naik boarded Train No.6591, Parbhani-Banglore Hampi Link Express, with a view to travel up to Marked Road Station in a general compartment. According to them, the deceased fell down in the station on account of a sudden jerk and died of multiple injuries. He was said to be aged 35 years and the matter was reported by the Railway officials themselves to the police and a case was registered. The appellant filed written statement opposing the claim. It was stated that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and that he fell down from the train on account of his own negligence and carelessness. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation to the respondents through its order dated 12.07.2002. The same is challenged in t...

Sree Rajesh Indistries. Vs. Shri K.K.Verma and Others.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

The Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act') and the revision under Section 115 of C.P.C., are between the same parties and arose out of the arbitration proceedings between them. Hence, they are disposed of through a common judgment.The appellant is an Electrical Contractor and undertakes the works of State Electricity Board and other establishments. It was entrusted with the contract of supply of material and erection of 132/25 KV Traction Sub-Stations at Kondapally, Bonakalu, Dornakal and Neekonda stations of South Central Railway, in the year 1983. The value of the contract was Rs.56,99,932/-. The appellant executed the substantial part of the contract. However, disputes arose between the appellant and the Chief Project Manager, Railway Electrification, the 3rd respondent. As provided for under the agreement, for the works, the matter was referred to respondents 1 and 2 for arbitration. Accordingly, they entered appearance and took up ...

M/S. Infomax Bpo Vs. Abdul Majeed Lakhani and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order :(Per Smt. M. Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in CC.No.817/2007 on the file of District Forum-1, Hyderabad , the opposite party preferred this appeal. The brief facts as out in the complaint are that the complainants are unemployees and the opp.party is engaged in the business of providing equipment for call center and the complainants attracted by the representations of opp.party approached them to take the equipment for 17 work stations along with other necessary equipment like computers, network, Audio Codes etc. to run the call center for eking out their livelihood. The opp.party promised to provide all the facilities such as Electricity, the Bandwidth and support staff on deposit of Rs.1,70,000/- towards security deposit. The opp.party agreed to provide all the facilities and the complainants have entered into an agreement for usage of call center equipment on 21.7.2006 and paid Rs.1,70,000/- towards security deposit to the opp.party. The opp.paty state...

Prof. P.Kusuma Kumari, W/O B. Subramanyam Reddy, Vice Chancellor, S.K. ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

ORDER: The petitioner, who was hitherto the Vice-Chancellor of Sri Krishna Devaraya University, Anantapur, (henceforth referred to as `University') has been removed from the said office by the Chancellor through orders dated 1.8.2010. Consequent thereto the State Government has made incharge arrangement through their orders contained in G.O.Rt. No. 546, Higher Education (UE.I) Department, dated 1.8.2010, validity of both these orders is challenged in this writ petition. The writ petitioner submitted that she was appointed as the Vice- Chancellor of the University and assumed charge of the said office on 23.8.2008 and that she was discharging her duties with utmost devotion and that she was carrying on the functions in accordance with the spirit of the Universities Act and rules and regulations framed by the University and that she has been functioning quite transparently and openly. The Executive Council Meeting of the University was held on 17.12.2008 and at that meeting it was unanim...

P.Kusuma Kumari Vs. the State of A.P.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

1. The petitioner, who was hitherto the Vice-Chancellor of Sri Krishna Devaraya University, Anantapur, (henceforth referred to as `University') has been removed from the said office by the Chancellor through orders dated 1.8.2010. Consequent thereto the State Government has made incharge arrangement through their orders contained in G.O.Rt. No. 546, Higher Education (UE.I) Department, dated 1.8.2010, validity of both these orders is challenged in this writ petition.2. The writ petitioner submitted that she was appointed as the Vice- Chancellor of the University and assumed charge of the said office on 23.8.2008 and that she was discharging her duties with utmost devotion and that she was carrying on the functions in accordance with the spirit of the Universities Act and rules and regulations framed by the University and that she has been functioning quite transparently and openly. The Executive Council Meeting of the University was held on 17.12.2008 and at that meeting it was unanimou...

K. Surekha Reddy Vs. V. Chandraiah

Court: Andhra Pradesh

The respondent filed O.S.No.656 of 2002 against the appellant in the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale. The suit was decreed ex parte, on 17-02- 2003. Thereafter, the respondent filed E.P., for execution of the decree. At that stage, the appellant came to know about the ex parte decree and filed I.A.No.1944 of 2008, under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. She pleaded that she was not served with the summons in the suit, nor did she engage an advocate, and that the ex parte decree was obtained by the respondent by playing fraud. It was urged that she came to know about the ex parte decree only on 20-09-2008, and her enquiries revealed that the trial Court proceeded as though vakalat was filed on her behalf. The application was resisted by the respondent. The trial Court dismissed the I.A., through order dated 23-06-2009. The same is challenged in this appeal. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant a...

G.Venkata Reddy Vs. B.Venkata Reddy and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2011(NOC)150(AP)

This revision is directed against the order dated 24.11.2009 passed in E.A.No.75 of 2009 in E.P.No.59 of 2009 in O.S.No.156 of 2000 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Hujurnagar, whereby and whereunder the learned Junior Civil Judge allowed the Execution Application filed by the Judgment debtor under Order XXI Rule 90 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, and, consequently, set aside the sale held on 9.3.2005 in E.P.No.59 of 2005. The 1st respondent herein is the Judgment debtor and the 2nd respondent is the decree holder in E.P.59 of 2009 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Hujurnagar. The decree holder brought the properties of the judgment debtor to sale. Auction of the properties has been held on 9.3.2005. The petitioner herein is the auction purchaser. He deposited 1/3rd of the amount on the date of auction, and subsequently deposited the 3/4th of the auction amount on 21.3.2005. While so, the judgment debtor filed E.A.No.75 of 2009 under Order XXI Rule 90 read...

Sri P.Ravi Prasad Goud. Vs. Sri P.Krishna and Others.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

The petitioner filed O.S.No.267 of 2007 in the Court of III Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad against the respondents for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale. The suit was decreed ex parte on 31.12.2007. It was to the effect that the petitioner shall pay the balance of consideration of Rs.5,25,000/- to the respondents within one month and if they refused to receive the amount, it shall be deposited into the Court within one month thereafter. That means by the end of February 2008, the amount should have been either paid to the respondents or deposited into the Court.The petitioner filed an E.P., for execution of the decree. He filed E.A.No.360 of 2008 under Section 148 of C.P.C. with a prayer to enlarge the time stipulated for depositing of the balance of sale consideration. The trial Court dismissed the I.A., through order dated 20.02.009. The same is challenged in this revision.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was ...

K.Durga Prasad Vs. Industrial Tribunal-cum-labour Court, Represented b ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

:ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Certiorari to call for the records relating to the Order made in I.A.No.61 of 2008 in I.D.No.199 of 2005 dated 1.7.2009 on the file of respondent No.1 and to quash the same as arbitrary and illegal. Petitioner is the workman and second respondent is the management. It appears, A.P. Medical and Sales Representative Union had taken up the cause of workmen as to his frequent transfers by the management and that was referred for industrial adjudication in I.D.No.199 of 2005 and the same was pending before the Labour Court, Ananthapur. While that being so, petitioner appears to have absented from duties and therefore, a charge sheet was issued and explanation was called for and having not satisfied with the explanation, an enquiry officer was appointed. The Enquiry Officer conducted an enquiry and submitted his report holding petitioner guilty of charges. Since the dispute in I.D.No.199 of 2005 was pending, management thought of obtaining permi...