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.
Shaik Saida Saheb Vs. the Registrar, Osmania University,hydera
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.18548 o17. 10-2012 Shaik Saida Saheb The Registrar, Osmania University,Hyderabad and 2 others. ^Counsel for the petitioner:Mr.P.Rameswara Prasad for Mr.V.Raghunath !Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2:Mr.Deepak Bhattacharjee, SC for OU Counsel for respondent No.3: Head Note: ?Cases referred: NIL Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.1 in refusing to issue Provisional Certificate in the LLB (Five Year Degree Course) to the petitioner. The brief facts leading to the filing of this Writ Petition are stated hereunder: The petitioner has joined the aforesaid Course in respondent No.1- University in the year 2005-06. As he could not pass the requisite number of subjects in the First Year, he was detained. However, it is not in dispute that he has cleared all the backlogs during the detention period and was, accordingly, re-admitted into LLB Second Year in respondent No.3- College ...
ilandfs; Engineering and Construction Compa Vs. Wardha Power Company L ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN COMPANY PETITION NO.240 OF 201.17-10-2012 IL&FS Engineering and Construction Company Limited Wardha Power Company Limited Counsel for the petitioners: Sri S. Ravi Counsel for respondent: Sri Ch. Ramesh Babu for the Central Government: Sri Ponnam Ashok Goud, Asst.Solicitor General HEAD NOTE: ?Citations:1. 1988 (BCLC) 685, 2) (2009) 151 Comp.Cas 446 (Bom) 3) (1988) Ch.D4. [2004] 55 SCL 1 (AP) 5) (1995) 83 Comp Cas 30 (SC) 6) 1933 AER Gh7. 1961 Chancery Divisio8. 1948 S.C9. (1989) BCLC 67 10) (1934) 1 Ch11. (1960) 30 Comp.Cas.367 (Cal) 12) (1988 (4) BCC 698.13) (1985) BCLC 22 (Ch.D) 14) [1985] 1 W.L.R15. (1999) 2 BCLC 59 (CA) 16) AIR 199.ORISSA 15 17) (1989) 66 Comp.Cas 387 (MP) 18) (2009) 150 Comp.Cas.415 (Mad) 19) (1992) 73 CC 517(MAD) 20) Judgment of Gujarat High Court dated 10.12.1969 21) (1972) 2 MLJ 41.22) 1902 W. N23. 53 Cal WN 20.at p24. AIR 195.Ca25. 1951 (1) Ch26. (1980)3 All ER 295.(Ch.D) 27) 1894 AC 39.28) (1951) I All ER 88.29) [...
M/S. Sponge Iron India Limited Represent Vs. M. Ramana Babu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR W.A.Nos.586 of 2008 and another 17-10-2012 WA NO.586/2008: M/S. Sponge Iron India Limited represented by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Regd.Office: Khanij Bhavan, Hyderabad. M. Ramana Babu Counsel for the appellant: M./s. M. Srikanth & Ms. Bharathi Devi Counsel for respondent : Sri S.A. Chari 1.(2000) 3 SCC 73.2.(2007) 8 SCC 23.3. AIR 200.Supreme Cour4. 1987 (Supp) SCC 1.5. AIR 200.Supreme Cour6. 2011 ALD (5) 713 (W.A.Nos.586 and 1171 of 2008) COMMON JUDGMENT: (per the Honourable Sri Justice C. PRAVEEN KUMAR) The writ appeals are directed against the order dt. 29-4-2008 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.15090/2005 wherein and whereunder a letter dt. 4-2-2005 issued by the respondent in writ petition (M/s. Sponge Iron India Ltd., Hyderabad) was questioned on the ground that it is violative of Arts.14,16,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India.2. For the sake of convenienc...
A.V.Venugopal Rao Vs. the Registrar, Andhra University, Visakh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.2151 o17. 10.2012 A.V.Venugopal Rao The Registrar, Andhra university, Visakhapatnam and others ^Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P.Bala Krishna Murthy !Counsel for the respondents: Dr.P.B.Vijay Kumar Head note: ?Cases referred: ORDER: The action of the respondents in not issuing LL.M Provisional Certificate to the petitioner is questioned in this writ petition. The petitioner who retired as Deputy Executive Engineer appeared in PGLCET-2007 and qualified for being admitted into LL.M (Two Year) Course. Accordingly, he has joined LL.M (Business Law) in Dr.B.R.Ambedkar College of Law, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam in the year 2008 and has completed the Course. When he applied for Provisional Certificate, he was denied the same by the respondents on the ground that in two subjects, namely, Legal Education & Research Methodology and Law of Export - Import Regulations, in II Semester, he did not get 40% of marks in the theory c...
Soma Narayana Vs. M/S Next Retails Shop M/S Videocon Distributors and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
Oral Order ( R.Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. He purchased Videocon washing machine on 18.08.2007 for consideration of `9,400/- and a warranty for a period of two years was furnished by the respondents. The appellant complained to the Manager, central service operations of the second respondent- company through his letter dated 26.04.2009 that the washing machine was not functioning and his complaint was rejected by the second respondent on the premise that the body parts affected is not covered by the warranty. The appellant has submitted that the tub of the machine got tilted due to faulty material used in the manufacture of connecting spindle which resulted in non-rotation of the tub. The appellant got issued notice dated 6.06.2009. 2. The respondents resisted the claim contending that as per the agreement the jurisdiction to try the complaint is limited to the jurisdiction of the courts at Aurangabad and that the machine was not used...
M/S Jai Maa Durga Traders Rep. by Its Prop. Mr.Jai Hind Prasad Vs. Ori ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
Order: (Smt. M. Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.117/2010 on the file of District Forum, Ranga Reddy District, the complainant preferred this appeal. The brief facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant is doing transport business in the name of M/s.Jai Maa Durga Traders, a partnership firm, established on 07-10-2006 with one Mr.T.Ramesh and complainant as partners. Thereafter due to certain differences between the partners, T.Ramesh retired from the partnership and a retired deed was executed on 02-5-2008. The complainant submitted that the said T.Ramesh was authorized signatory and once he had withdrawn from the partnership, the retirement deed was submitted to the bank and on the same day, the opposite party bank made necessary entries in the computer deleting the name of Mr.T.Ramesh as authorized signatory and issued a new cheque book on 03-5-2008. Subsequently the complainant was out of town and returned in the month of November, 2009 an...
M/S.Creative Constructions, Rep. by Its Proprietor and Another Vs. Mal ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
Oral Order: (Honble Justice Sri D.Appa Rao, President) 1. This revision petition is preferred by the opposite parties against the order of the District Forum, Srikakulam, directing them to deposit the amount of the minors. 2. On the complaint filed by Mallareddy Babu Rao, the husband of R.2, father of R.3 to R.6 and son of R.7 herein, the District Forum by its order dated 27.02.2006 in CC.No.168/2005 directed the opposite parties/revision petitioners herein to execute sale deed for plot Nos. 1 to 4 after receiving the balance of sale consideration @ Rs.12,600/- per cent, and pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and costs of Rs.1,000/- within two months. 3. As against the said order, the revision petitioners filed an appeal and also a Writ Petition before the High Court and they were dismissed. 4. Pursuant to the above orders, the respondents 2 to 7 herein, filed P.P.No.33/2006. In the meantime, while the matter is under enquiry, R.2 to R.6 have entered into compromise with the revision pet...
National Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office Iv, Jeevan Bhava ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
Order (Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in CC 19/2010 on the file of District Forum, Nalgonda, opposite party No.4 preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainants husband joined as a member in Sahara Rajath Yojana/Silver year Labh yojana depositing Rs.10,004/- through opposite party No.3 on 31-10-2003 and was given a passbook cum certificate. Thereafter the complainants husband died on 01-5-2008 due to an accidental fall from a height and died at Yashoda Hospital, Hyderabad. On 29-5-2008, the complainant filed a claim with opposite parties 2 and 3 with all the original documents but the opposite party paid only the death maturity amount of Rs.14,599/- on 01-10-2009 but did not pay the death benefit compensation amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. As per the terms and conditions of the said scheme, the nominee shall be entitled for insurance compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-, if accidental death occurs after 4 years and upto 10 years. I...
S.Laxminarayana Vs. Tahsildar, Proddatur Mandal, Kadapa District and A ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
Oral Order: (Honble Justice Sri D.Appa Rao, President) This is an appeal preferred by the complainant against the order of dismissal of his E.A.No.14/2011 on the ground of suppression of real facts. The appeal arises in this way. On the complaint filed by the complainant against the Tahsildar and Mandal Surveyor to sub-divide his property and hand over possession, the District Forum by its order dated 03.02.2009 allowed the complaint directing the respondents to sub-divide the property by metes and bounds as per the records together with compensation and costs. Pursuant to the order, he filed EA.No.14/2011 u/s.27 of Consumer Protection .Act. The respondents, the State Government officials contested the matter by stating that the complainant was not in possession and enjoyment of the property. In fact the property belonged to one Mallela Lakshumma from whom one Undela Ramasubba Reddy took the land for starting brick manufacturing unit for a period of ten years and he was in possession a...
The Branch Manager, M/S.Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Rep ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Oct-17-2012
Oral Order: ( Honble Justice Sri D. Appa Rao, President) The learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo stating that the matter has been adjusted outside the court and requested that the appeal be dismissed. In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed. The appellant is permitted to withdraw the statutory amount by filing a cheque petition....
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »