Andhra Pradesh Court January 2012 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.
Veeramani and Another Vs. Mumtaz Ali @ Mumtaz Ahmed and anr
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J.ORDER:1. The petitioners, who are defendant Nos.1 and 2 in the suit filed by respondent No.1, filed this Civil Revision Petition against order, dated 13.12.2000, in I.A.No.182 of 1998 in O.S.No.95 of 1998 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereunder the application filed by the petitioners seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for short "the Code") was dismissed. The present Civil Revision Petition was dismissed against respondent No.2 who died, and in whose place legal representatives were not brought on record. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. No one appears for espondent Nos.1 and 3.2. The only ground on which the petitioners filed the said application before the Tribunal was that the earlier suit filed by respondent No.3 in O.S.No.2198 of 1987 on the file of learned X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, against them for declarat...
Sriven Marketings, Hyderabad. Vs. the Union of India,
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
ORDER: 1. Petitioner, a propriety concern, is engaged in the activity of trade in agricultural products, particularly, buying and selling Popcorn - Maize. The proprietor also claims that he is an agriculturist engaged in cultivation of popcorn. 2. It is stated that petitioner enters into contracts with farmers, who are engaged to grow popcorn-maize and in turn petitioner provides support price to the farmers. Popcorn is said to be widely grown in Karnataka and parts of Andhra Pradesh and the cultivation is spread on an extent of 1,000 acres per season. Though Maize, as an agricultural produce, is widely grown in India, one of its varieties i.e. popcorn is generally imported from United States of America and Argentina under the Customs Act, 1962 and Foreign Trade Policy under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. Petitioner states that popcorn, which is imported, as above, is of better quality and cheaper in value than the one domestically grown and in order to ensur...
G.Ashok Kumar Goud Vs. Smt.P.Anjali Bai and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
JUDGMENT: 1. This criminal appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 18.01.2006 in C.C.No.621 of 2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tandur, Ranga Reddy District. 2. The appellant/complainant filed the appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate acquitting the first respondent/accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. I have heard Sri N.Vasudeva Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Sri B.Vijaysen Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. 4. The appellant filed a complaint against the first respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that the husband of the first respondent borrowed an amount of Rs.4 lakhs from him under a promissory note, the first respondent in discharge of the said loan, borrowed by her husband issued a cheque on 30.10.2003, the said cheque was presen...
Sriven Marketings, Hyderabad. Vs. the Union of India, Rep. by Its Secr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.16349 o23. 01.2012 Sriven Marketings, Hyderabad. The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Customs, Government of India, New Delhi and five others. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. D.V. SEETHARAMA MURTHY For MR. N. ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: MR. PONNAM ASHOK GOUD ASST. SOLICITOR GENERAL MR. M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO Cases referred 1. (2006) 4 SCC 16.2. (1995) 1 SCC 34.3. 1996 (86) ELT 3 (SC) = (1996) 5 SCC 26.ORDER: Petitioner, a propriety concern, is engaged in the activity of trade in agricultural products, particularly, buying and selling Popcorn - Maize. The proprietor also claims that he is an agriculturist engaged in cultivation of popcorn.2. It is stated that petitioner enters into contracts with farmers, who are engaged to grow popcorn-maize and in turn petitioner provides support price to the farmers. Popcorn is said to be widely grown in Karnataka and parts ...
The Fishermen Marketing Cooperative Soci Vs. the Commissioner of Fishe ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU WRIT PETITION No.1356 o23. 01-2012 The Fishermen Marketing Cooperative Society,Moosi Project, Kethepalli M, Nalgonda District. The Commissioner of Fisheries and 2 others Counsel for the Petitioner : M/s.M.Vidyavathi Counsel for the Respondents : G.P. for Fisheries ORDER : The petitioner-society represented by its president questions proceedings of the 1st respondent/Commissioner of fisheries initiating enquiry under Section 51 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act (in short, the Act) against the affairs of the society on two grounds viz., (1) that the requirements under Section 51 of the Act are not existing for ordering enquiry thereunder; and (2) that since the 2nd respondent-Deputy Director of Fisheries is also notified as Registrar in respect of fishermen cooperative society, the Commissioner may not exercise the powers of Registrar under Section 51 of the Act. 2) By G.O.Ms.No.1968, F&A, dated 14.06.1966, the Governor of Andhra...
Veeramani and Another Vs. Mumtaz Ali @ Mumtaz Ahmed and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1650 o23. 01.2012 Veeramani and another Mumtaz Ali @ Mumtaz Ahmed and another Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri T.C.D.Sekhar for Sri P.Venugopal Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 3: None appeared ORDER: The petitioners, who are defendant Nos.1 and 2 in the suit filed by respondent No.1, filed this Civil Revision Petition against order, dated 13.12.2000, in I.A.No.182 of 1998 in O.S.No.95 of 1998 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereunder the application filed by the petitioners seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for short "the Code") was dismissed. The present Civil Revision Petition was dismissed against respondent No.2 who died, and in whose place legal representatives were not brought on record. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. No one appears for respondent Nos.1 and 3. The only grou...
Linga Reddi Lakshmana Reddy, S/O.Chenga Vs. the State,rep. by the Auth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.1621 o23. 01-2012 Linga Reddi Lakshmana Reddy, S/o.Chenga Reddy, The State,Rep. by the Authorised Officer, Special Tahsildar, Land Reforms, Chittoor Counsel for the petitioner: Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy Counsel for the respondent: None. Order: The civil revision petition is filed against the common judgment dated 12- 02-2002 in L.R.A.C.No.7 of 1990 on the file of the learned I Additional District Judge cum Chairman, L.R.A.C.Tribunal, Chittoor, whereby he has confirmed the order dated 24-4-1990 in C.C.No.1277/SKHT/1975 on the file of the Land Reforms Tribunal, Chittoor.2. I have heard Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner. There is no representation for the respondent at the hearing.3. One Linga Reddy Anki Reddy is the common ancestor. He had two sons, by name Pola Reddy and Rami Reddy. Pola Reddy had three sons. The petitioner is the son of one of the three sons, namely, Chinna Chenga Reddy. The petitioner...
Perim Janardhana Rao S/O. Perim Raja Vs. Malepati Balaji S/O. M.Pushpa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY C.R.P.No.1649 o23. 1-2012 Perim Janardhana Rao s/o. Perim Raja Malepati Balaji s/o. M.Pushpaiah Naidu and others Counsel for petitioner : Sri V. Jagapathi Counsel for respondents : Sri Dammalapati Srinivas ?CASES REFERRED:1. (1978) 10 Ch.D. 393 : (1874-80) All.E.R. Rep.Ext 1612 (CA) 2. (1884) 26 Ch.D. 700 (CA) 3. AIR 196.S.C....
M/S Janachaitanya Housing Limited Rep. by Its Chairman and Managing Di ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The opposite parts are the appellants. The respondent filed complaint before the District Forum seeking direction to the appellant company to register the plot bearing number 107 admeasuring 400 sq.yards in Sai Laxmi II Venture at Nanakramguda, Hyderabad covered by pass book No.250(N) and passbook No.253(N) in favour of the respondent duly receiving the balance sale consideration of `3,00,000/- at the time of registration and to pay damages to the tune of `2,00,000/- and costs of `10,000/-. 2. The respondent entered into agreement with the appellants to purchase two plots in Sai Laxmi II Venture at Nanakramguda, Serlingampalli Mandal,Hyderabad R.R.District under membership Nos.250 and 253. The cost of each plot is `3,40,000/- to an extent of 200 sq.yards and the amount is payable in 40 monthly installments besides special installments. The development charges would be fixed at the time of registration of the sale deed. Th...
The Branch Manager the New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Smt M. Lalitham ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-23-2012
Oral Order : (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. Facts of the case giving rise to filing of the appeal are that the fourth respondent insured his Lorry bearing registration number TN-69C-3766 with the appellant insurance company by paying premium of `10,856/-. On 12.04.2003, the driver of the fourth respondent, M.Kistappa was proceeding in the lorry from Hyderabad to Hindupur and the lorry met with an accident at Pothulamadugu and he died at the spot. The Police, Annasagar registered a case in crime number 43 of 2003. The respondent nos.1 to 3 filed Workmen Compensation case W.C.No.3 of 2004 before the Assistant Commissioner of labour and he had passed an award in favour of the respondent nos.1 to3. After receiving the amount under the award, the respondent nos.1 to 3 issued notice to the fourth respondent claiming additional compensation of `2,00,000/- under personal accident clause of the insurance policy. 2. The fourth respondent had not chosen to contest the claim...