Andhra Pradesh Court October 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.
The Branch Manager, New India Assurance Co.Ltd., Khammam Rep. by Its A ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-30-2012
Oral Order : (Sri R.Lakshmi Narasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The respondent filed complaint seeking for indemnification of a sum of `1,93,825/-said to have been incurred for repairing of the insured Matiz car with interest, compensation and costs. 2. The respondent, is a doctor by profession insured the Matiz Car bearing registration No. AP 11 J 9958 with the appellant-insurance company for the period 25.1.2009 till 24.1.2006. On 17.5.2005 when the respondent with his family members was proceeding in the car, its left front tyre got burst, AXLE was broken as a result of which the respondent lost control over the steering of the vehicle and the car dashed to a lorry stationed on the side of the road and the car sustained damage. 3. The respondent made complaint to the police, Rajanagaram and intimated the accident to the appellant-insurance company. The police imposed compounding fee on the respondent. The surveyor appointed by the appellant assessed the loss caused to the vehicle. The ...
The Baggage Services In-charge Indian Airlines Terminal and Another Vs ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-30-2012
ORAL ORDER: (Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) This is an appeal preferred by airlines opposite parties 1 and 2 against the order of the Dist. Forum directing it to pay Rs. 8,550/- towards loss of baggage together with compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and costs of Rs. 5,000/-. 2) The case of the complainants in brief is that they are the legal practitioners and residents of Visakapatnam. On 8.8.2007 both of them travelled in Indian Airlines flight from Hyderabad to Mumbai on their way to Bangkok. They booked two personal baggage bearing ticket Nos. 464102 and 464103 to be unloaded at Mumbai. On arrival at Mumbai they could collect only one baggage bearing ticket no. 464103 while the other baggage bearing ticket No. 464102 a big suit case was missing. It contains clothes, jewellery etc., since they were going to Bangkok, Malaysia and Singapore for site seeing. When the appellant informed that they would trace the baggage and deliver at the places indicated they furnished the pla...
Apsrtc Rep. by Its Managing Director Mus Vs. Labour Court Ii, Hyderaba ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE WRIT PETITION No.13683 OF 200.29-10-2012 APSRTC REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MUSHEERABAD, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS LABOUR COURT II, HYDERABAD REP. BY ITS PRESIDING OFFICER AND ANOTHER Counsel for the petitioner: Standing Counsel for APSRTC Counsel for the respondents: GOVT. PLEADER FOR LABOUR : ?CITATIONS: ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation challenging the order dated 25-02-2000 in M.P.No.4 of 1998 passed by the 1st respondent-Labour Court II, Hyderabad. The said Miscellaneous Petition was filed by the 2nd respondent under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') contending that he was working as a conductor in the petitioner-Corporation on daily wages; that on 14-11-1988 there was a check by a TTI and a charge memo was issued to him; that the petitioner had issued orders keeping him under put off duty from 15.11.1988; that after an enqui...
B. Buchi Reddy Vs. D. Anitha
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
Oral Order: (Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The opposite party being proceeded exparte in the complaint, has filed appeal contending that the dispute involved in the matter is not consumer dispute and that the appellant is not served with any notice in the complaint which he came to know on service of notice in the execution proceedings. It is contended that the order passed by the District Forum is against the principles of law. 2. The respondent filed complaint stating that she entered into construction agreement with the appellant for construction of house in her plot bearing number 71 situate ate Ambedkar Nagar, Jillelliguda, Hyderabad on4.03.2010 for consideration of `4,10,000/-. As per the terms of the agreement, the appellant agreed to complete the construction of the house within two months from the date of agreement. The respondent paid the amount of `4,10,000/- and an excess amount of `40,000/- to the appellant and the appellant failed to complete the construct...
India Info Line Securities Pvt Ltd. Rep. by Its Managing Director and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
Oral Order: (Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The opposite parties no. 1 and 2 are the appellants. The first respondent has filed complaint before the District Forum seeking , i) to return the shares i.e., IPCL 98 shares, RIL 60 shares, Punjab and National Bank 34 shares and Reliance communication 60 shares, ii) to transfer the holdings of IDFC 20 nos, Reliance energy Ventures-60 nos. and Reliance Natural 60 nos, iii) to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- and iv) to pay costs. 2. The District Forum has awarded the following reliefs: i) to return the shares i.e., IPCL 98 shares, RIL 60 shares, Punjab and National Bank 34 shares and Reliance Communication 60 shares. ii) to transfer the holdings of IDFC 200 nos, Reliance energy Venture-60 nos. and Reliance Natural-60 nos. iii) to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- and iv) to pay costs of Rs.1,000/-.3. The first respondent has submitted that he was allotted d-mat account No.ID-10176266 by the appellants and on being requested by the s...
Andhra Bank, Rep. by Its Chief Manager Vijayawada MaIn Branch Vs. Abot ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
Oral Order (Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The opposite party is the appellant. Being aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the opposite party has filed the appeal contending that the notice was not served on it and that the FDR of the respondent was cancelled and she had withdrawn the amount covered under the FDR and that the respondent is not entitled to the amount. 2. The respondent filed complaint that she deposited an amount of `50,000/- with the appellant-bank under Abhaya Gold Savings Bank Account bearing number 0602010000 on 6.12.2008 for the maturity value of Rs.60,168/-and after expiry of the maturity date, she requested the appellant-bank and on its failure to pay the amount, she got issued notice on 29.11.2010. 3. The appellant-bank proceeded exparte. 4. The respondent filed her affidavit and the documents, ExA1 to A3. 5. The District Forum allowed the complaint on the premise that the appellant-bank had not inadvertently issued receipts and as such t...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Rep. by Its Divisional Manager Vs ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
Oral Order: (Honble Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) This is an appeal preferred by the opposite party insurance company against the order of the Dist. Forum directing it to pay Rs. 2,36,000/- amount covered under the policy. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that he is the owner of Maruthi van, and got it insured under comprehensive insurance policy covering the period from 19.7.2005 to 18.7.2006. While so, it met with an accident on 14.11.2005 in the State of Tamil Nadu. The said fact was informed to the insurance company whereupon a surveyor was drafted. The insurance company by its letter dt. 30.1.2006 repudiated the claim on the ground that the driver was not having valid and effective driving license. Assailing the repudiation, he claimed the amount covered under the policy together with compensation and costs. 3) The appellant insurance company resisted the case. While admitting issuance of policy and the factum of accident and the appointment of surveyor John Simpson...
Dr. D. Ramesh Sarojini Eye Hospital Natraj Vs. Manchikanti Satish @ Sa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
Oral Order: (Per Honble Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) This is an appeal preferred by the opposite party doctor of an eye hospital against the order of the Dist. Forum directing him to pay Rs. 2,20,000/- together with costs of Rs. 2,000/-. 2) Originally on the complaint filed by the complainant the Dist. Forum by its order dt. 14.10.2008 granted the above compensation for medical negligence against which the appellant preferred FA No. 1557/2008 and this Commission by order dt. 25.5.2010 allowed the appeal dismissing the complaint. As against the said order, the National Commission on the revision preferred by the complainant in RP No. 2861 of 2011 remanded the matter and the National Commission by its order dt. 22.7.2012 opined that this Commission did not set-aside the findings of the Dist. Forum with regard to Ex. B1 which the Dist. Forum opined that it was fabricated, and directed this Commission to decide it afresh in accordance with law. 3) In the light of remand order, we hea...
Smt. Kanneboina Seshamma and Others Vs. Kinnera Superspecialty Hospita ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
Oral Order: (Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The unsuccessful complainants are the appellants. They filed complaint with the averments that the husband of first appellant was a technician, organ player and musician with M/s Anna Audio Lab Hyderabad and used to earn a sum of `20,000/- per month. He visited Khammam, his native place on 8.11.2004 and developed stomach-ache and he was taken to the respondent no.1 hospital where he was admitted and initially diagnosed with suffering from acute pancreatitis. The respondents advised for ultrasound scan of abdomen which indicated pancreatic outline. Serum analysis test was carried out on 8.11.2004 which revealed abnormal level. Initially, the fourth respondent had examined the first appellants husband. 2. The appellants have contended that the fourth respondent is not a qualified doctor and the third respondent failed to carry out required diagnostic tests and allowed the fourth respondent to monitor the condition of the patient ...
M/S Kapil Chit Fund (P) Ltd., Rep. by Its Branch Manager and Another V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
Oral Order: (Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. M/s Kapil Chit Funds Pvt Ltd is the appellant. The appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum whereby the appellant was directed to refund the monthly subscription with interest @9% p.a. from the date of complaint till payment. 2. The respondent subscribed to the chit group bearing number ONTO IP/35 for chit value of Rs.10,00,000/- conducted by the appellant company and the chit period was for 50 months on monthly subscription @ `20,,000/-.. The chit was commenced from 27.04.2007 and the respondent participated in the auction conducted in the month of October,2006 for the prize amount of `3,26,000/- . The respondent was declared successful bidder. The respondent claimed that he furnished the sureties as required by the appellant company and as the appellant- company failed to pay the prize amount, he got issued notice 13.03.2009 claiming the prize amount with interest and compensation. 3. The appellant-chit fund...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »