Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
E.Sanjeeva Reddy Vs. the State of A.P
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-2011
1) The petitioner is witness No.11 in Crime No.168/2011 of Chandanagar Police Station of Cyberabad relating to offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 I.P.C and Sections 25 of the Indian Arms Act. He seeks cancellation of bail granted by this Court to the 2nd respondent/3rd accused in Crl.P.No.4843 of 2011 by order dated 27.06.2011. 2) The offence pertains to ghastly murder of a practising advocate by name S.Ashok Reddy which took place on 26.03.2011. At about 10.55 A.M on that day when the deceased was going into Mandal Revenue Office, Serilingampalli mandal, the assailants attacked him by throwing chilli powder on his face and stabbing him with knives. As many as 33 stab injuries were inflicted on body of the deceased. The deceased died on the spot. As on today, the police completed investigation and filed charge sheet before the Magistrate. It is alleged by the prosecution that six of the accused persons stabbed the deceased while four of the accused persons guard...
B.N. Manga Devi and Another Vs. the State of Ap,rep. by Its Principal ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-2011
The two petitioners in this writ petition mount a challenge to an order dated 07-06-2011 passed by the Tahasildar, Saidabad Mandal, Hyderabad District, in terms of Sectrion 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, (henceforth referred to as 'the L.E.Act') for their eviction, from the land said to be belonging to the Government unauthorisedly occupied by them. The case of the petitioners is this; the 1st petitioner purchased an extent of 108.69 square meters of land covered by premises No.16-1-24/60/1, Saidabad Colony, Hyderabad, under a registered sale deed dated 29-07-1980 bearing document No.775/81. The 2nd petitioner purchased another extent of 309.35 square meters of land, which also forms part of the same premises, through another registered sale deed dated 29-07-1980, bearing document No.8101/80. Both the petitioners purchased the respective extents of land from Sri G. Balaiah, who, in turn, purchased the same from one Sri Lakshminarayan, under a registere...
Satyadeva Sannakaru Rythu Sangham Vs. the State of Ap Rep by Its Princ ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-2011
1. Satyadeva Sannakaru Rythu Sangham, Peddapuram, East Godavari District, the petitioner herein, assails the proceedings dated 22.01.2005 of the Assistant Commissioner, Multi Zone-I, Endowments Department, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, the fourth respondent, and the appellate order dated 16.09.2005 passed by the Regional Joint Commissioner, Multi Zone-I, Endowments Department, Kakinada, East Godavari District, the third respondent, in Appeal No.19 of 2005 confirming the same, whereby and whereunder it was held that the petitioner Sangham was not eligible to claim benefit under Section 82 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for brevity, 'the Act of 1987'). The petitioner Sangham seeks a consequential declaration that its members are landless poor persons and that they are entitled to the benefit of Section 82 of the Act of 1987 in respect of the lands held by them on lease belonging to Sri R.V.B.S.Choultry, Peddapuram, the f...
C.Narsimlu Vs. Sai Baba Agencies, (Distribution of Hindustan Petroleum ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2011
Oral Order :( Per Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.D.No.109/08 on the file of District Forum, Nizamabad, the complainant preferred this appeal. The brief facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant was allotted LPG connection no.614836 from opposite party no.1 dealer and opposite party no.2 is the manufacturer. The complainant obtained refills from time to time from opposite party no.1 vide subscriber no.1353419 . On 3.2.2008 opposite party no.1 took the original pass book and other papers from the subscriber for verification and did not return the same. On 3.3.2008 the complainant lodged a complaint with the appropriate authorities in Praja Vani for non furnishing of the above papers. Opposite party no.1 stopped supplying the refills stating that there is a criminal case pending against the complainant. The complainant addressed a notice to opposite party no.1 on 30.7.2008 with a copy to opposite party no.2. Inspite of receipt of notice, opposit...
A. Deva Raj Vs. Jana Harsha Estates ânâ Constructions Ltd., ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2011
R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member: 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. The District Forum has dismissed the complaint as barred by limitation. 2. The appellant joined as a member in Dream City-II Garden Unit Scheme floated by the respondent company. The respondent allotted four plots each measuring 120 sq.yards for a consideration of Rs. 36,000 for each plot payable in 50 monthly instalments vide allotment letter dated 29.6.2002. The appellant paid an amount of Rs. 99,920 and the balance amount of Rs. 44,080 was payable on 2.7.2005. 3. The appellant has contended that the executives of the respondent company used to collect the instalments at his residence and they had stopped collecting the amount from 2.7.2005. It is contended that the respondent company refused to receive the balance amount and execute the sale deed. 4. The respondent company resisted the claim on the premise of lack of jurisdiction of the District Forum as also the maintainability of the complaint on th...
Smt. M.Parvathi Vs. Sri G.Ravi Shankar
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2011
Oral Order :(per Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.30/05 on the file of District Forum , Ranga Reddy Dist. the complainant preferred this appeal. The brief facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant purchased an unfinished flat no.104 in Sai Koushik Castle admeasuring 780 sq.ft. from the opposite party and a Sale Agreement was executed and thereafter a Sale Deed dt.29.6.2002 was executed. The complainant submits that after occupation, he found that there was a shortage of 105 sq.ft. and that the opposite party agreed to pay the deficit amount of Rs.70,000/-. The Flat was taken possession in a semi finished condition and the opposite party did not complete the unfinished works. A legal notice was also issued on 30.8.2004 and the opposite party vide their letter dt.1.5.03 promised to remove the ventilator and drainage pipes from the outside walls. Thereafter the electricity connection was disconnected for a period of 133 days and after paying ...
Mohd. Ashfaq Vs. Kaaba Hospital and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D.Appa Rao, President.) 1) This is a complaint filed claiming compensation of Rs. 1 crore towards medical negligence for not exercising reasonable care and skill while conducting circumcision operation. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that his son Mohd. Affan was born on 11.2.2009. After he became 15 days old he was taken to the opposite party hospital for circumcision operation. Accordingly Ops 2 and 3 after collecting a sum of Rs. 500/- towards fee operated the boy for circumcision. After surgery it was found that glans was bleeding. When questioned Op3 stated that there nothing abnormal and asked to bring him on the next day. On the next day it was found that there was a deep cut injury between the basic organ and testicles. It was found that glans has become ecymosed and turned blackish. On 4.3.2009 Op3 himself took the boy to Cure-Well hospital for consultation and had discussions with a senior doctor. On 5.3.2009 his condition became...
S.Krishna Vs. the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2011
Oral Order :(per Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.165/08 on the file of District Forum, Kurnool, the complainant preferred this appeal. The brief facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant applied for water tap connection to his house on 29.5.2006 and obtained a DD for Rs.1210/-. He was given a receipt by the assistant of the service centre, Municipal Corporation, Kurnool and they sanctioned a tap on 7.2.08 and the tap was fixed on 12.2.2008. As per the conditions laid down in the receipt the opp.parties should fix the tap within 30 days and should compensate for the period if there is a default by the opp.parties at Rs.50/- per day. In the instant case there is a delay of 582 days in providing the tap connection and therefore the complainant seeks for compensation of Rs.29,100/- i.e. 582 days x Rs.50/- per day. The complainant got issued legal notice on 29.2.08 seeking compensation and costs together with payment of Rs.29,100/- Opposite pa...
Srinivas Chowdhary Vs. Prabhakar Yelmeli
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-11-2011
Typed to the dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.551/2007 on the file of District Forum-III, Hyderabad, the opposite party preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant who is the owner of Lorry No.MWC 4477 and resident of Sholapur District. In the course of business, on 20-10-2002, the lorry was engaged by Bashveshwar Transport to transport cloth from Sholapur to Hyderabad and some unknown persons had stolen 12 bundles of cloth from the loaded truck and the driver of the lorry lodged a complaint. The Police conducted panchanama and when the driver informed the complainant he also approached the police for assistance. Meanwhile the Branch Manager of Deepak Transport, Hyderabad requested the Police to send the lorry for unloading the remaining goods at the Vanasthalipuram godown. Accordingly the police permitted Deepak Transport and imposed a condition to redeliver the lorry in the Police Station but ...
Rajoli Siva Rami Reddy, Kadapa District Vs. Malepati Subba Rangiah and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-2011
1. This revision is directed against the order dated 23.9.2010 passed in I.A.No.1241 of 2008 in O.S.No.116 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, whereby and whereunder, the learned Senior Civil Judge dismissed the application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent to deposit 100 bags of paddy crop into the Court. 2. Background facts, in a nutshell, leading to filing of this revision by the plaintiff in O.S.No.116 of 2007, are: - The petitioner herein filed O.S.No.116 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 28.2.2007 and also for injunction. According to him, respondents 1 and 2 are owners of the suit schedule property and they agreed to sell the property for Rs.2,31,600/- and accordingly, executed an agreement of sale dated 28.2.2007. The petitioner-plaintiff filed I.A.No.1241 of 2008 under Section 151 CPC seeking direction to the 3rd respondent to depo...