Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
Yadagir Shanganti Vs. Radiant Infosystems Pvt. Ltd.Rep. by Its Directo ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-29-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) Appellant is unsuccessful complainant. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that the respondents started a project by name Rajiv Internet Centre (herein after called RIC) at various places on BOP (build, own and operate) model wherein R1 was consortium partner entered into a contract on 31.8.2005 whereby he became entitled for maintenance of KIOSK at RAJiv at Koutala of Adilabad District. He responded to it by enclosing a demand draft for Rs. 1,000/- towards application fee. On 16.6.2006 R1 directed him to pay license as well as franchise fee of Rs. 1,25,000/- which he had paid. On 5.8.2006 on receipt of amount by R1 franchise agreement dt. 11.10.2006 was executed. As per the agreement R1 shall provide, set up, install, commission and maintain the KIOSKS equipment viz., desk top, dot matrix printer, UPS, scanner, barcode reader, smart card reader, and credit card swipe terminal etc., and to provide training in manage...
N. Surender Rao Vs. Smt.T.Shardha and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-29-2011
(Typed to the dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.821/2007 on the file of District Forum-III, Hyderabad, the opposite party No.1 preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant entered into an agreement of sale dated 14-8-2003 with opposite party No.1 for purchase of flat No.203 in second floor admeasuring 1045 sft. for a total sale consideration of Rs.10,10,116/- and paid an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (by demand drafts bearing Nos.293505 to 293509 for Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs.3,00,000/- by cash). The complainant submitted that opposite party No.1 agreed to receive the balance sale consideration after completion of the flat and at the time of registration. Thereafter opposite party No.1 completed major portion of the construction leaving only minor amenities and the complainant requested opposite party No.1 to register the sale deed in her favour in the month of July, 2005 where upon opposite party No.1 deman...
Mylabathula Mary Emasteen Vs. the Branch Manager Lic of India Canal Ro ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-29-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) This is an appeal preferred by the complainant aggrieved by the order of the Dist. Forum directing her to withdraw the amount deposited by the insurance company towards full satisfaction besides awarding costs of Rs. 2,000/- denying the benefits covered under the policies. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that her husband late Mylabathula Bullabbai worked as A.A.O in respondent insurance corporation and died on 20.5.2001. During his life time, he took three policies for Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 35,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- and on their maturity she was entitled to receive as nominee. Without assigning any reason she was denied the amounts. On that she got issued a lawyer notice for which no reply was came to be issued. Therefore she sought Rs. 1,70,264/- towards maturity value of the policies together with interest @ 24% p.a., besides Rs. 10,000/- towards mental agony and costs. 3) The respondent insurance company resisted ...
Sajja Harinath Vs. the Manager Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank MaIn Road
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-28-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) Appellant is unsuccessful complainant. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that he had taken jewel loan and discharged it on 10.3.2004 and took back the jewellery on the very same day. While so, a notification was issued by the respondent bank in Eenadu daily on 11.3.2004 showing his name as one of the borrowers. It has also debited publication charges of Rs. 251/-. By then no guidelines were issued for collection of publication charges informing auction of gold jewellery. Contrary to the guidelines the bank had collected the charges. Due to these acts he suffered mental agony besides loss of reputation, and also financial loss. When he had paid the entire amount the bank ought to have intimated the newspaper office through e-mail or FAX to delete his name. After five years the bank had returned the charges on 29.9.2009. All this amounts to deficiency in service, and therefore claimed a compensation of Rs. 1 lakh and...
Vakat Lav Kumar Proprietor, Santhi General Stores Rajaji Street, Nello ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-28-2011
Oral Order: (Per Honble Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) This is an appeal preferred by the complainant against inadequacy of compensation granted by the Dist. Forum. 2) The case of the complainants in brief is that complainant No. 1 is the proprietor of Shanthi General Stores, while complainant No. 2 is the owner of premises bearing No. 17/3, Rajaji Street, Nellore. They insured the building for Rs. 19 lakhs and the stock in trade for Rs. 20 lakhs covering the period from 4.2.2005 to 3.2.2006. While so on 4.9.2005 that there was fire accident due to which out of the stock worth Rs. 13,30,475/-, the stock worth Rs. 5,64,227/- was completely destroyed while stock worth Rs. 4,28,935/- was partly damaged. Apart from it, computers, printers and scanners worth Rs. 2 lakhs were damaged. A qualified engineer estimated the damage to the building at Rs. 1,25,000/- On a report the police registered a case and also by the fire department. When the insurance company did not settle the claim, the...
Andhra Bank, Service Centre Rep. by Its Branch Manager Vs. Smt. G. Sow ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-28-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D.Appa Rao, President) 1) This is an appeal preferred by Andhra Bank (Op1) against the order of the Dist. Forum directing it to pay a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- together with costs of Rs. 2,000/-. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that she opened an account with Andhra Bank, Seethammadhara branch of Visakapatnam. Later her husband got a job in Hyderabad.. On 18.6.2009 she issued an a/c payee cheque for Rs. 50,000/- in favour of her husband drawn on Andhra Bank, Visakapatnam. When her husband presented the cheque through his account at SBH, High Court Branch, Hyderabad the cheque was returned on 19.6.2009 with endorsement of insufficient funds. In fact, she had Rs. 58,778/- in her account sufficient to honour the cheque. It has also debited Rs. 66/- towards cheque bounce charges. Alleging it amounts to deficiency in service she filed the complaint claiming compensation of Rs. 1 lakh together with costs. 3) The appellant bank did not choose ...
M/S.Sri Vyshnavi Constructions and Developers Rep. by Its Managing Par ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2011
Oral Order: (per Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.709/2008 on the file of District Forum-1, Hyderabad , the opp.parties 5 to 7 preferred F.A.No.543/2009 and Complainants preferred F.A.No.1033/2009 . As both these appeals arise out of a common complaint they are being disposed of by this common order. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the opposite parties 6 and 7 are in construction business i.e. construction of apartments in the name and style of Sri Vyshnavi Constructions and Developers i.e. opp.party no.5. Opp.parties 1 to 4 are the owners of property bearing municipal no.3-4-823/1 admeasuring 759 sq.yards situated at Barkatpura, Hyderabad (referred to as Schedule A property) and opp.parties 1 to 4 entered into a development agreement dt.2.8.2004 with opp.party no.5 rep. by opp.parties 6 and 7 for construction of apartment complex in the said place. Opp.parties 6 and 7 constructed an apartment complex in the said place consisting of 1...
P. Siva Reddy Vs. Industrial Development Bank of India and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2011
Typed to dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.820/2007 on the file of District Forum-I, Hyderabad, the complainant preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant is a retired engineer and he being attracted by the offer of opp.parties promising to pay maturity value for Bonds at high rate of interest he applied for allotment of bonds and the opposite party allotted the following bonds: a)IDBI Infrastructure Bond (99-A) 2 Nos. having distinctive no.0003424571 and 3424572, b) IDBI Flexi Bonds (1) Nos.2 having distinctive nos .0001031347-348 value for Rs.5,000/- each. c). IDBI Flexi Bonds (11) Nos. having distinctive nos.0002828974-976 face value of Rs.5000/- each . The complainant applied for four IDBI Flexi bonds (17) by paying the required amounts. Opp.parties instead of issuing certificate for four bonds issued three bonds having face value of Rs.5000/- each. The complainant addressed several letters ...
Smt.T.Hymavathi Vs. the I.F.C.i. Ltd., Rep. by Its Chairman and M.D., ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2011
(Typed to the dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.691/2008 on the file of District Forum-III, Hyderabad, the complainant preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant purchased a 30 year Millionaire Bond floated by Industrial Finance Corporation of India Limited in July, 1996 and due for redemption in September, 2026 in the nature of Zero Coupon Bonds. The complainant attracted by the offer invested a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards one Millionaire bond and nominated her daughter Kum.T.Priyanka Naidu as beneficiary to collect the amount of Rs.10,00,000/- for her future studies etc. on full redemption in the year 2026. The complainant submitted that the opposite parties vide letter dated 16-11-2004 intimated the complainant that they have decided to exercise call option and redeem the Millionaire Bond on 06-12-2003 and requested all bond holders to surrender their original documents for the purpose of rede...
M/S.Chabbra Associates, Rep. by Its Managing Partner Vs. M/S. Icici Lo ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2011
(Typed to dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.1066/2007 on the file of District Forum-1,Hyderabad , the complainant preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant obtained comprehensive insurance policy No.3001/50017918/00/000 Hyd/Mtrclm/1381/2006 from opposite party with respect to vehicle Mercedes Benz car bearing registration No.AP12 D 3000. On 26.12.2006 the car deck was stolen from the car at complainants residence during the night hours and during the said time the policy was in existence. The complainant immediately gave a complaint about the theft to the police, Chilkalguda, Secunderabad on 27.12.2006 and the police investigated the matter and issued a letter dt.10.1.2007 stating that the said system was not traceable. The opposite party deputed their surveyor G.Ram Murthy and another employee Seetaram Raju for investigation. The complainant informed them about the theft of the music system an...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »