Andhra Pradesh Court August 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 Regional Commissioner (Wrongly Shown as the Commissioner in Cc) Co ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
Oral Order: (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The opposite party has challenged the order dated 15.9.2010 passed by the District Forum on the premise that after receipt of the online SB Account Number of the respondents husband from the Singareni Collieries on 23.09.2010, the appellant settled the claim of the respondent by fixing the widow pension for `437/- and arrears for `49,996/- and deposited the amount into her SN Account. The appellant deposited the amount on 23.09.2010. It is contended that the office of the commissioner of CMPF is situated at Dhanbad in Jharkhand and not at Godavarikhani. The office of Regional Commissioner is situated at Godavarikhani. 2. The facts of the case leading to filing of the appeal are that the respondents husband was an employee of the Singareni Collieries Company Ltd at Mandamarri with employment code no.2282606 and during the period of his service he contributed an amount of Rs.19/- to the appellant towards family pension. He...
G. Krishnaiah Vs. M/S Best Buy Living Rooms
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
Oral Order: (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. 2. The appellant purchased sofa set on 10.11.2008 from the respondent. The sofa set is represented to be made with quality cushion and good quality leather and it would last for about 28 years. The consideration for the sofa set is `38,000/-. The sofa set was delivered at the house of the appellant on 10.12.2008. the appellant used the sofa for a month without there being any problem and thereafter the layer of the Rexene utilised in the sofa is said to have begun to peel off gradually and the appellant stated to have been unable to use the sofa. The appellant stated to have requested the respondent either to repair the sofa or replace it with a good quality defective free sofa and the respondent stated to have postponed it on one pretext or the other. The appellant could not pursue the matter from 10.7.2009 to 8.10.2009 as he had been to the UK. 3. After returning to India ...
Chalasani Venkateswara Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-iv
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
(Prayer: Income tax Tribunal Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellant Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench “B”, Hyderabad in I.T.A.No. 1529/Hyd./94, dated 08-02-2000, for Assessment Year 1989-90, preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Vijayawada, dated 05-08-1994 in ITA No. 33/V/CIT(A)/94-95,preferred against the order of the Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Vijayawada, PAN/GIR NO.V-1636/V-4, Dated ---29-03-1994.) M.S. Ramachandra Rao, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/assessee under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenging the order dated 08-02-2000 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "B" Bench, Hyderabad in I.T.A.No.1529/Hyd/94 for the assessment year 1989-90. 2. The appellant was a partner in a firm by name M/s.Theatre Radha, a registered firm at Vijayawada along with one Y.Kalyana Sundaram under a partnership deed dated 06-07-1976 with retrospective effect from 26-06-1...
Narne Gopikrishna and Another Vs. State of A.P. Rep by Public Prosecut ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
N.V. Ramana, J. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment dated 08.08.2008, passed by the VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Visakhapatnam, in S.C. No. 5 of 2008, convicting the appellants-accused for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months each, and further convicting them for the offence under Section 379 IPC and sentencing them to suffer imprisonment for a period of six months each. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that P.W.3 is the mother of the deceased, namely Pondara Raju. The deceased, P.W.5 and L.Ws. 8 to 11 used to live in opposite rooms in the house of P.W.7 at Chattivanipalem and became friends. About fifteen days prior to the incident on 05.06.2006, the deceased along with P.W.5 came from Thippanaputtuga, Ichapuram Mandal to Gajuwaka and joined in A.B.B.S. Talent Training Ce...
Union of India, Rep. by the General Manager and Others Vs. Debashish P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issued a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction in the nature of Writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records relating to the order passed by the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribinal, Hyderabad Bench, at Hyderabad in O.A.No.466 of 210 dt. 21-3-2012 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.) C. Praveen Kumar, J. 1. Challenging the order dated 21.03.2012, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad in O.A.No.466 of 2010 the present Writ Petition is filed. 2. The facts in brief are that the first respondent herein while working as Loco Pilot (Goods) Grade-I at Vijayawada Railway Station, South Central Railway, committed misconduct by absenting himself unauthorizedly from duty for 84 days from 23....
M/S. Charminar Papers Limited Vs. Special Deputy Collector (La) Unit V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
(Prayer: WAMP.No. 666 of 2012: Petition under Section 151 of CPC Praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court will be pleased to stay all further proceedings including dispossession of the petitioner’s property in the land in survey No. 117 admeasuring AC.3-34 guntas in Muttangi Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District.) 1. This writ appeal is directed against the order by the Hon’ble learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition, being WP.No.11357 of 2009 dated 12.11.2010. 2. Admittedly, it appears that in this matter it is specifically stated and admitted by the writ petitioner/appellant that the award has been passed on 01.11.2007 and possession of the land was taken on 19.11.2007 and in view of that the title dispute with regard to the land of the writ petitioner, the matter was referred to Civil Court under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') and that is the reason, the writ petitioner ha...
T. Venkatswamy Vs. Agiru Pullaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
(Petition under Section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in IA No.107 of 2012 in OS No.16 of 2010 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Kollapur, Mahabubnagar District dated 20-6-2012 pending disposal of the above Civil Revision Petition.) The revision is filed against the order in I.A.No.107 of 2012 in O.S.No.16 of 2010 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge at Kollapur. 2. The revision petitioner is the defendant. The suit was filed for recovery of money on the basis of a promissory note. The trial of the case was completed and the matter is coming for arguments. At that stage, the present application is filed for sending the suit document to the expert. The Court below has dismissed the application finding that the Court itself can compare signature under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act. 3. Naturally, delay in filing an application for expert is a good ground for reje...
T.Venkat Swamy Vs. Agiru Pullaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.R.P.No.3642 OF 201.03-08-2012 T.Venkat Swamy Agiru Pullaiah !Counsel for the Petitioner ^Counsel for the Respondent ?Cases referred 1) 2008(3) ALD 11.(SC) 2) 2011(6) ALD 74.ORDER:- The revision is filed against the order in I.A.No.107 of 2012 in O.S.No.16 of 2010 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge at Kollapur. 2. The revision petitioner is the defendant. The suit was filed for recovery of money on the basis of a promissory note. The trial of the case was completed and the matter is coming for arguments. At that stage, the present application is filed for sending the suit document to the expert. The Court below has dismissed the application finding that the Court itself can compare signature under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act. 3. Naturally, delay in filing an application for expert is a good ground for rejection of the same. So also the comparison of the signatures by the Court itself is not generally warranted and unless there i...
M/S. Charminar Papers Limited, Hyderabad Vs. Special Deputy Collector ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL No.327 o03. 08.2012 M/s. Charminar Papers Limited, Hyderabad. Special Deputy Collector (LA) Unit VI, ORR Projects, HUDA, Tarnaka, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Appellant: MR. GHANTA RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent: MR. Y. RAVINDRA (SC FOR HUDA, ORR)ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL HEAD NOTE: Cases referred 1. AIR 201.SC 166.2. (2008) 4 SCC 69.JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sri Pinaki Chandra Ghose) This writ appeal is directed against the order by the Hon'ble learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition, being WP.No.11357 of 2009 dated 12.11.2010. 2. Admittedly, it appears that in this matter it is specifically stated and admitted by the writ petitioner/appellant that the award has been passed on 01.11.2007 and possession of the land was taken on 19.11.2007 and in view of that the title dispute with regard to the land of the writ petitioner, the matter was refe...
Union of India, Rep. by the General Mana Vs. Debashish Pal
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.19350 OF 201.03.08.2012 Union of India, Rep. by The General Manager, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad & 3 others. Debashish Pal Counsel for Petitioners : M/s. P.Gangarami Reddy Counsel for Respondent: Sri K.R.K. V. Prasad ?Cases referred 1. (2008) 7 SCC 58.2. (2012) 3 SCC 17.3. (2009) 7 SCC 30.ORDER: (Per CPK, J) 1 Challenging the order dated 21.03.2012, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad in O.A.No.466 of 2010 the present Writ Petition is filed. 2 The facts in brief are that the first respondent herein while working as Loco Pilot (Goods) Grade-I at Vijayawada Railway Station, South Central Railway, committed misconduct by absenting himself unauthorizedly from duty for 84 days from 23.02.2005 to 17.05.2005 without prior sanction of leave and not observing the Railway Medical Attendance Rules. Because of his unauthorized absence, the re...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »