Andhra Pradesh Court January 2011 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.
Amarthaluri John Kennedy,s/O.George Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
:ORDER: 1. This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the accused against the judgment, dated 23.6.2006 in Criminal Appeal No.164 of 2004 on the file of the XI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, at Tenali, Guntur, whereby the conviction and sentence imposed on the accused by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Repalle, by judgment dated 02.4.2004 in C.C.No.22 of 2003, was confirmed. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 26.02.2003 at about 1.30 p.m. the deceased was going on his cycle to his village, while so, a lorry bearing No.ADG 279 came at high speed from behind driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver and dashed against the cycle and ran over the cyclist causing severe injuries. PWs 2 to 6 who are eye witnesses to the accident along with PW.1 removed the injured to the Super Speciality Hospital at Guntur for treatment. However, he succumbed to the injuries while undergoing treatment there. Cherukupalli P.S. registered a case in Crime...
Dr.Abdul Lateef Jabbar Vs. M/S Global Hospitals (a Unit of Ravindranat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
(Typed to the dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant is a renowned radiologist and joined in M/s Vijaya Diagnostic Center, Hyderabad as a senior Radiologist and also was attending other hospitals as part time doctor and was earning Rs.50,000/- per month. The opposite party no.1 is the company, opposite party no.2 is the Managing Director of opposite party no.1, opposite party no.3 is the consultant ortho and spine surgeon of opposite party no.1. Opposite party no.4 is India Medtronic Pvt. Ltd., a company and opposite parties no.5 and 6 are the manager and territory manager of opposite party no.4. The complainant submits that he has been suffering from chronic neck pain radiating to both shoulders and upper back since 1997 for which he had an MRI and consulted a neuro surgeon who advised for C3/C4 C4/C5 anterior cervical discectomy which was done at Madras and left for fusion. As this also did not relieve the pai...
M/S. Bijay Auto Services Rep. by Its Proprietor S. Ravi Prakash Baid a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
Oral Order: (Per Honble Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) While the complainant filed F.A. No. 997/2008 against inadequacy of compensation awarded, the insurance company preferred F.A. No. 1001/2008 against very granting of compensation. 2) The parties are described as arrayed in the complaint for felicity of expression. 3) The case of the complainant in brief is that he is an IOC dealer doing business in sale of petroleum products and Cand F agent for Indian Oil lubricants. He supplies the above products through different types of vehicles and one of its vehicle TATA 407 bearing No. AP 31 W 2452 is insured with the insurance company for Rs. 3.50 lakhs covering the period from 2.7.2003 to 1.7.2004. While so it met with accident on 12.6.2004 and was heavily damaged. On intimation a preliminary survey was conducted by the insurance surveyor. After submitting quotations they agreed to get it repaired at Vijayawada where originally the vehicle was built. A bill was submitted for Rs. 1,12,...
A. Venkateswara Rao Vs. the New India Assurance Co., Ltd., and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2011
Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant wherein his complaint was dismissed by the District Forum. 2. The case of the complainant as seen from the complaint is that he purchased Goods carriage vehicle bearing No.AP 10T 9776 from the opposite party no.2 on 4.2.2003 and the vehicle was insured by the opposite party no.2 with the opposite party no.1 insurance company vide policy No.612800 for the period from 30.10.2002 to 29.10.2003. The vehicle was involved in an accident on 6.4.2003. The complainant had submitted claim to the opposite party no.1 which was repudiated by the opposite party no.1 on the ground that the claim was not within the purview of the policy. The complainant sustained a loss of `80,298/- as per the surveyor report submitted to the opposite party no.1. 3. The opposite party no.1 filed counter stating that the claim was repudiated for the reason that on the date of the accident neither the complaina...
Palam Buddagandla Obaiah Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-29-2011
:: 1. The sole accused who preferred this revision was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sidhout for the offence under Section 418 I.P.C. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred criminal appeal No.164 of 2002 before the Sessions Court. The learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah dismissed the appeal. Hence this revision. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 4.09.2001, the accused tried to cheat the bank by pledging four bangles with it as if they were gold bangles while the bangles sought to be pledged by the accused were not gold bangles. Alleging that the accused, thus, cheated the bank, P.W.1 - Manager of the bank lodged Ex.P.1 complaint with the police. Police registered the complaint as Ex.P.2 F.I.R. The accused was arrested on 20.09.2001 by the police. 3. The accused allegedly approached the bank on 4.09.2001 at about 11.30 A.M. with four ...
Jeedipalli Bhaskar and Others Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
:ORDER: 1. On the basis of the report given by N. Chakravarthula Ramaseshacharyulu, a case in Crime No.39 of 1996 was registered against Nagendla China Chennaiah of Seethanagulavaram village and three others for the alleged offence punishable under Section 386 of IPC. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that there are eight accused persons and hence, A1 to A7 were arrested on 17.9.1996 and the said China Chennaiah, who is arrayed as 8th accused, was arrested on 24.9.1996. After completion of the investigation in Crime No.39 of 1996, the Sub-Inspector of Police, T.V.Palli Police Station filed a charge sheet against the petitioners and others for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 386 and 386 read with 120-B of IPC. As the 6th accused by name K. Danial was absconding, the case was split up and the petitioners herein were tried in the said case. During the course of trial, the complainant was examined as P.W.1, his brother was examined as P.W.2 and eight more w...
Venkateswara Tea Traders Vs. Madhu Agencies
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
:ORDER: 1. This revision is directed against the orders of the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narasaraopet, dated 6.04.2004 in C.C. No.98 of 2002. The revision petitioner is the complainant. Respondent No.1 is the accused. 2. Respondent No.1 did not appear despite service of notice.3. The complainant laid a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,1881 against the accused before the trial Court. The complaint was laid on 24.11.2001. On 1.03.2002, the trial Court ordered notice to the accused. The case was adjourned from time to time before the trial Court for appearance of the accused. The case stood posted to 6.04.2004 for appearance of the accused. Indeed, the accused did not appear before the Court on that day. However, the complainant also did not appear before the trial Court on that day. In view of non-appearance of the complainant before the trial Court, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused under Section 256 Cr.P.C. through the ...
Dr.Madina Balakrishna Vs. B.Suryam and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
:O R D E R: 1. Cause for concern in this contempt case is that a minion of the justice delivery system, the Amin of the Junior Civil Judge's Court, Palasa, the first respondent, is alleged to have wilfully disobeyed the order of this Court along with a litigant, the second respondent.2. The second respondent and three others, having purchased the suit scheduled property in O.S.No.9 of 1997 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Sompeta, from the decree holders/plaintiffs, instituted E.P.No.7 of 2009 before the said Court seeking execution of the eviction decree dated 02.02.2000 passed therein. On 30.04.2009, the executing Court issued a warrant of execution by delivery of the scheduled property and posted the matter on 10.06.2009 for further consideration. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner herein, being the Judgment Debtor in O.S.No.9 of 1997, filed CRP No.2235 of 2009 before this Court on 20.05.2009. This Court, taking note of the fact that the E.P. had been adjourned to 10.06.2...
Medam Rami Reddy Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2011
:ORDER: 1. The prosecution laid a case against two accused for the offences under Sections 447, 324 and 506 (2) I.P.C. Both the accused faced trial before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Podili. Through Judgment, dated 01.07.2000, the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Podili, acquitted A.2 of the offences leveled against her. He found A.1 guilty for the offence under section 324 I.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- with appropriate default sentence. A.1 was also convicted for the offence under section 447 I.P.C. and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.200/- together with appropriate default sentence. 2. Aggrieved by the same, A.1 preferred Criminal appeal No.117 of 2000 before the V Additional Sessions Judge Ongole. Through the impugned judgment dated 30.04.2004, the learned V Additional Sessions Judge, Ongole, confirmed the conviction for the offence under Section 324 I.P.C. The learned Sessi...
Housing Development Finance Corporation (Hdfc) Rep. by Its Deputy Gene ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D.Appa Rao, President.) 1) This is an appeal preferred by the opposite party Housing Development Finance Corporation (HDFC) against the order of the Dist. Forum directing it to return the registered sale deed dt. 27.12.1990 besides compensation and costs. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that he was an employee of ECIL. Along with others he purchased 200 sq.yds of plot bearing No. 177 in S.No. 407, 409 and 412 at rampally village of Medchal mandal in Ranga Reddy Dist., under registered sale deed dt. 27.12.1990. The developer M/s. TPS Housing Pvt. Ltd., approached his employer ECIL to develop the plots by raising the construction for residential purpose, and his employer undertook to make payments by deducting the EMIs from out of their salaries. When the said developer did not raise any structures for several years, he raised structures in order to protect his property. There upon he filed C.D. 95/1995 against the Managing Director of the d...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »