Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
Aloor Subrahmanyam Vs. Suthram Prabhakar and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-2012
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5008 o12. 03.2012 Aloor Subrahmanyam Suthram Prabhakar and another ^Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri S.V.Bhatt !Counsel for respondent No.1: Sri B.Pridvi Kumar for Sri K.V.L.Narasimha Rao Cases referred:1. 2010(3) ALT 63.2. 2007(3) ALT 19.3. AIR 197.SC 117.ORDER: This civil revision petition arises out of order, dated 06.09.2010, in I.A.No.835 of 2008, in O.S.No.53 of 2008, on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Chittoor. I have heard Sri S.V.Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri B.Pridvi Kumar, learned counsel, representing Sri K.V.L.Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Even though notice is sent to respondent No.2, the same has not returned served or otherwise. Respondent No.2 has adopted the stand of respondent No.1 taken in the written statement filed before the lower Court and as respondent No.1 is contesting this case, it is not necessary to await service of notice ...
Nuziveedu Seeds Pvt. Ltd Hyderabad Vs. the Protection of Plant Variety ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-2012
ORDER: 1. This writ petition is instituted by a company involved in seed production. A writ of mandamus is solicited for declaring the advertisement of the 2nd respondent's applications in respect of MRC-7918, MRC-7041 BGII and MRC- 7160 varieties in the "Plant Variety Journal of India" without following the due procedure specified under the provisions contained in Sections 19, 20, 21 read with Rule 29 and 30 of Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 as illegal and unconstitutional and for other allied reliefs. 2. The 2nd respondent is also a seed manufacturing company whose applications for registration, have been advertised by the 1st respondent authority constituted in terms of the aforesaid Act. On behalf of the 2nd respondent, M/s. Lakshmi Kumaran & Sridharan, who entered appearance, circulated a letter to the Registry on 7.2.2012, that the issue raised in this writ petition is covered by the judgment rendered by a Division Bench on 24.1.2012 in Writ Appeal No...
Sri A.Bala Prasad Vs. the State Government of A.P. and ors
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-2012
JUDGMENT: 1. The petitioner was working as Superintendent of Observation Home for Boys, at Guntakal, Anantapur District. An item of news was published on 18.11.1999 in Vaartha daily, alleging that the petitioner has extracted work from one of the inmates of the Observation Home. Learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Guntakal, who was working at that time (for short 'the Magistrate'), who was also functioning as Magistrate of the Juvenile Court, addressed an Official Memo, dated 18.11.1999, directing the Station House Officer (SHO), II Town Police Station, Guntakal, to register FIR against the petitioner, for the offences punishable under Sections 344, 346, 363, 365, 367, 368, 370 and 374 I.P.C. Mention was also made to Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code'). Referring to these facts, the Station House Officer, filed a report on 30.07.2001. However, the same was not accepted by the Magistrate. It was six years thereafter, that another report was...
Sri A.Bala Prasad Vs. the State Government of A.P. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-2012
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.4846 o09. 03.2012 Sri A.Bala Prasad The State Government of A.P. and others Counsel for the petitioner: Party-in-person Counsel for the Respondents : GP for Home ?cases referred:1. (1992) Supp (1) SCC 33.2 (2008) 9 SCC 61.3 AIR (37) 1950 Calcutt4. AIR (38) 1951 SC 20.5 (1977) 4 SCC 45.6 1996 Crl. L.J. 612 JUDGMENT: The petitioner was working as Superintendent of Observation Home for Boys, at Guntakal, Anantapur District. An item of news was published on 18.11.1999 in Vaartha daily, alleging that the petitioner has extracted work from one of the inmates of the Observation Home. Learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Guntakal, who was working at that time (for short 'the Magistrate'), who was also functioning as Magistrate of the Juvenile Court, addressed an Official Memo, dated 18.11.1999, directing the Station House Officer (SHO), II Town Police Station, Guntakal, to register FIR against the petitioner, for the offences pu...
K.Venkata Satya Bhaskara Rao Vs. P. Lakshmi Kantha Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Mar-09-2012
Oral Order (Per Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member. ) Aggrieved by the order in E.A.No.24/2009 in C.C.No.52/2008 on the file of District Forum, Vizianagaram, the complainant preferred this appeal The brief facts as set out by the J.Dr. in this appeal are that the District Forum by its order dated 22-1-2009 in C.C.No.52/2008 directed the opposite party to complete the construction of four flats as per the terms of the agreement and deliver possession of the same to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of the order and further directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation within one month and on his failure to pay the same directed to pay the same with interest at 9% p.a. till the date of payment together with costs of Rs.5,000/-. As the order was not complied with, the complainant filed E.A.No.24/2009 U/s.27 of C.P.Act to send the J.Dr. to jail for not complying the order. The complainant contended that an amount of Rs.1,06,075/- was not paid which was ordered to be...
M. Umamahesh Vs. the Proprietor, Agarwal Computers and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member Aggrieved by the order dt. 14.6.2010 in C.C.No.622/2008 on the file of Dist Forum-II, Hyderabad , the complainant preferred this appeal. The brief facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant purchased a computer printer LJHP3015 from opposite party no.1 shop on 26.11.2005 for Rs.13,950/- and he was assured by opposite party no.1 that the warranty was for one year from the date of delivery. The complainant submits that the printer is giving stray black line on every copy and he registered a complaint on 4.1.2006 vide call reference no.2207107812-221 with opp.party no.3. Opposite party no.3 retained the printer for a period of four months and returned it to the complainant noting in the Customer Service Order against the Fault Description as POOR PRINT QUALITY and the Repair Summary as DNB32 CLEANED THE SCANNER ASSY AND PAPER PATH TESTED PRINTER WORKING FINE. The service center effected the repair of the printer three more times as the same de...
Ms. Sbi Global Factors Ltd Vs. M/S Suryachakra Power Corporation Ltd
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-05-2012
ORDER: 1. This petition, seeking winding up of the respondent - Company, is filed under Section 433 (e) & (f) read with Section 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act'), and Rule 95 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. 2. The petitioner is a subsidiary of State Bank of India (S.B.I.), and is a Company incorporated under the Act. On its amalgamation with S.B.I. Factors and Commercial Services Private Limited, a fresh certificate of incorporation was issued by the Registrar of Companies on 18.03.2010 certifying that the name of the petitioner-Company was changed to S.B.I. Global Factors Limited. The respondent is a Company incorporated under the Act on 8.2.1995, with its registered office at Hyderabad. The authorised share capital of the respondent - Company is Rs.90 crores divided into nine crore equity shares of Rs.10/- each. The main objects of the respondent - company is to generate, harness, develop, accumulate, distribute and supply electricity by setting up thermal p...
Ms.Raghunath Agrotech Pvt. Ltd., Rep. B Vs. M/S.Ajanta Agro Industries ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-05-2012
Order: 1. The plaintiff in OS.No.35 of 2008, filed this Civil Revision Petition against Order, dated 02-11-2011, in IA.No.243 of 2010, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Adilabad. The petitioner- Company filed the aforesaid suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.6,42,516/- from the respondent- Industry and an ex parte decree was passed on 29-01-2009. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an Execution Petition. After receipt of EP notice, the respondent filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the CPC') for setting aside the ex parte decree. As there was delay of 30 days in filing the said application, the respondent has filed IA.No.243 of 2010 seeking condonation thereof. The petitioner filed a detailed counter-affidavit wherein it resisted the said application. 2. The petitioner has denied the allegation of the respondent that it has not received the suit notice and that therefore, it has no knowledge of passing of an ex parte decre...
M/S.Raghunath Agrotech Pvt. Ltd., Rep. B Vs. M/S.Ajanta Agro Industrie ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-05-2012
The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Civil Revision Petition No.709 o05. 03-2012 M/s.Raghunath Agrotech Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director Rajeev Kumar Mittal M/s.Ajanta Agro Industries, rep. by its Prop.Govind Seth., ^Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.S.Surender Reddy !Counsel for the respondent: --- Order: The plaintiff in OS.No.35 of 2008, filed this Civil Revision Petition against Order, dated 02-11-2011, in IA.No.243 of 2010, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Adilabad. The petitioner- Company filed the aforesaid suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.6,42,516/- from the respondent- Industry and an ex parte decree was passed on 29-01-2009. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an Execution Petition. After receipt of EP notice, the respondent filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the CPC') for setting aside the ex parte decree. As there was delay of 30 days in filing the said application, the respondent has filed IA.No.243 of...
M/S. Sbi Global Factors Ltd Vs. M/S Suryachakra Power Corporation Ltd ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-05-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN COMPANY PETITION No.154 o05. 03-2012 M/s. SBI Global Factors Ltd M/s Suryachakra Power Corporation Ltd Hyderabad Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Deepak Bhattacharjee Counsel for the Respondent: Sri P. Sri Raghuram HEAD NOTE:1. [1988] 11 QB 51.2) 1990 (69) Com. Cases 178 (Kar 3) [1909] ILR 3.Cal 936 [FB 4.AIR 196.SC 137.5) (1976) 46 Company Cases 87 (Madras High Court 6) (1970) 40 Company Cases 554 (Bombay High Court) 7) (1972) 2 SCR 20.8) (1991) 70 Company Cases 195 (Bombay High Court) 9) (1965) 35 Company Cases 456 (SC) 10) (1992) 73 Comp.Cases 136 (Mad) 11) [1971] 41 Comp Ca12. (2010) 10 SCC 55.THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN COMPANY PETITION No.154 OF 201.ORDER: This petition, seeking winding up of the respondent - Company, is filed under Section 433 (e) & (f) read with Section 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act'), and Rule 95 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959.2. The petitioner is a subsidiary of State Ba...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »