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.
Sivagallu Sailu Vs. the State, Station House Officer, Kothur
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 1261 of 2008 and 519 o27. 08-2012 Sivagallu Sailu The State, Station House Officer, Kothur Police Station, Mahaboobnagar District, rep., by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Counsel for appellant: Sri K. Chidambaram Counsel for Respondent: Public Prosecutor HEAD NOTE: Cases referred 1) Criminal Appeal No. 369 of 2008, dated 25.04.2012 2) 2004 (2) ALT (Crl.) 571 (DB) 3) 2011 ALT (Crl.4. AIR 199.SC 304.5) 1997 JT SC 61.Common Judgment: (Per Justice Sri. N.V. Ramana) These two Criminal Appeals, under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the first by the appellant-accused through his Advocate and the second through Legal Aid question the conviction and sentence imposed against the appellant herein, by judgment dated 10.07.2008 passed in S.C. No. 292 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the I Additional Sessions Judge at Mahabubnagar. The case of the pros...
Kanala Obula Konda Reddy Vs. 1. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limit
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.25971 o27. 08-2012 Kanala Obula Konda Reddy 1. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director & Ors. COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER: SRI C.V.BHASKAR REDDY COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT No.1 TO 3.SRI THOOM SRINVIAS ^COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT No.5: SRI O.MANOHAR REDDY Head Note: CITATIONS:1. (2009) 1 SCC 29.2) AIR 197.S.C. 851 ORDER: This writ petition has been taken out by Kanala Obula Konda Reddy seeking mandamus declaring the action of the Senior Regional Manager, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, LPG Regional Office, Anantapur, A.P.-2nd respondent in issuing the proceedings vide Ref.not SSP/LPG, dated 06.05.2010, disqualifying him as LPG Dealership/Distributorship of Duvvur Village and Mandal, Kadapa District, as illegal and arbitrary. The consequential relief to set aside the letter of intent, dated 09.08.2010, issued in favour of Ms.Arundhathi Gangi Reddy- 5th respondent, has also been sough...
P.V.Satyanarayana Murthy and Others Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18707 OF 201.27.08.2012 P.V.Satyanarayana Murthy and others The State of Andhra Pradesh and others Counsel for petitioners: Sri P.Venugopal Counsel for Respondents : GP for Revenue HEAD NOTE: ?Cases referred 1. (2000) 6 SCC 65.2. AIR 196.SC 26.ORDER: The petitioners feel aggrieved by the order, dated 20.05.2011, passed by the Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam, the 2nd respondent herein. The facts, in brief, that gave rise to the filing of the writ petition are as under: The petitioners were issued house site pattas, in respect of plots, varying in size from 293 square yards to 355 square yards, in survey No.164 of Chingadila Village, Visakhapatnam Mandal and District, on 31.05.1979. They were also put in possession of the plots. One of the conditions imposed was that, houses must be constructed, within a period of 12 months from the date of allotment. The Tahasildar of the Mandal, the 4th respondent, sought to cancel the pattas, on...
G. Jayalaxmi and Others Vs. Syed Anwar HussaIn Quadri and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the claimants in OP No.41 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Court, Kurnol, wherein and where under, a claim for an amount of Rs.11.00 lakhs as compensation for the death of Banda Nagamalleswara Rao was denied. 2. First appellant is the wife and appellants 2 and 3 are the children of the deceased. According to them, on 31.01.1999 at about 7.00 PM, the deceased was driving his motorcycle bearing No.AP 04 A 4736 and was proceeding from Yemmiganur to Ananthapur. His brother B. Mallikarjuna was the pillion rider. It is stated that a lorry bearing No. AP.02T.6366, which was proceeding in front of their motorcycle, suddenly slowed down the speed by applying brakes. As a result of which, the motorcycle driven by the deceased dashed against the lorry from its back side. The deceased sustained head injury and died on the spot. P.W.2 who was the pillion rider also sustained grievous injuries. In con...
Dandu Laxmaiah Vs. the Mandal Revenue Officer, Tahsildar, Ranga Reddy ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
Common Order Both these writ petitions are filed challenging the proceedings, dated 02.11.2011. Hence, they are being disposed of by a common order. For the sake convenience, the parties herein are referred to as arrayed in W.P.No.1621 of 2012. The petitioner was assigned Acs.3.20 gts. of land in Survey No.300/26 of Kongarakalan Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The land was needed for public purpose namely establishment of an Industrial Park by APIIC. Therefore, it was resumed to the Government, with the obligation to pay exgratia to the assignee. The petitioner states that his father owned agricultural land admeasuring Acs.12.20 gts. in Survey Nos.231 and 232 of the said village and himself and his brother, late D.Narsimha - the husband of the 2nd respondent got equal shares. According to him, mistake occurred in the proceedings of mutation and in the process his signatures were taken by his brother on some papers. According to him, the land in Survey No.300/26, wh...
M.R. Venu Vs. Smt.Veluchuri Lakshmi and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
The unsuccessful defendant in O.S.No.119 of 1994 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram is the appellant herein. 02. The suit was one filed for recovery of a sum of Rs.70,800/- alleging that the defendant has borrowed a sum of Rs.50,000/- on 06-09-1992 and executed a promissory note in favour of one Laxmi Narsu who in turn transferred the promissory note on 06-11-1993 for consideration in favour of the first plaintiff at Srungavarapu Kota. 03. The defendant claimed that he did not borrow any amount from the original holder Laxmi Narsu who is an employee of I.O.B at Chittoor. The defendant obtained some loan from IOB, Chittoor and at that time the original holder obtained signatures on blank papers and the suit promissory note might have been fabricated. The suit is, therefore, not maintainable. He also pleaded that the court at Vizianagaram has no jurisdiction to try the case. 04. After considering the evidence on record, the trial court has decreed the suit and i...
M.R.Venu Vs. Smt.Veluchuri Lakshmi and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO SECOND APPEAL NO.598 OF 201.24-08-2012 M.R.Venu Smt.Veluchuri Lakshmi and others Counsel for the Appellant : Sri K.G.Krishna Murthy Counsel for the Respondent: Sri Ravi Cheemalapati : : Cases referred:1. AIR 200.A.P2. AIR 195.A.P3. 1969 An.W.R4. AIR 196.A.P5. 2010 (5) ALT 9.(D.B) 6.AIR 191.MADRAS 22 JUDGMENT:- The unsuccessful defendant in O.S.No.119 of 1994 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram is the appellant herein. 02. The suit was one filed for recovery of a sum of Rs.70,800/- alleging that the defendant has borrowed a sum of Rs.50,000/- on 06-09-1992 and executed a promissory note in favour of one Laxmi Narsu who in turn transferred the promissory note on 06-11-1993 for consideration in favour of the first plaintiff at Srungavarapu Kota. 03. The defendant claimed that he did not borrow any amount from the original holder Laxmi Narsu who is an employee of I.O.B at Chittoor. The defendant obtained some loan from...
Dandu Laxmaiah Vs. the Mandal Revenue Officer,tahsildar, Ib
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.1621 OF 201.and Batch (WRIT PETITION Nos.1621 AND 316.OF 2012.24.08.2012 Dandu Laxmaiah The Mandal Revenue Officer,Tahsildar, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal,Ranga Reddy District and another Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Vijay B.Paropkari Counsel for Respondent No.1 : Government Pleader for Revenue : : ?Citations: COMMON ORDER: Both these writ petitions are filed challenging the proceedings, dated 02.11.2011. Hence, they are being disposed of by a common order. For the sake convenience, the parties herein are referred to as arrayed in W.P.No.1621 of 2012. The petitioner was assigned Acs.3.20 gts. of land in Survey No.300/26 of Kongarakalan Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The land was needed for public purpose namely establishment of an Industrial Park by APIIC. Therefore, it was resumed to the Government, with the obligation to pay exgratia to the assignee. The petitioner states that his father owned agricultural ...
Mandapaka Narasinga Rao @ Narasinga Rao and Another Vs. State of Andhr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2012
The petitioners are A.1 and A.2. They seek for the quashment of P.R.C.No.17 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tekkali. The P.R.C was under Section 323 I.P.C and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’). 2. Sri A.V. Sesha Sai, learned counsel for the petitioners, contended that on an incident that allegedly occurred on 16.10.2006 the second respondent who is the de facto complainant, lodged a complaint with Tekkali Police Station and that the same was registered as F.I.R in Crime No.158 of 2006. After due investigation, police filed a final report on 04.12.2006 considering that the allegations were false and that the case deserves to be referred as false. While so, the de facto complainant lodged the present complaint on 03.10.2008, like a protest petition, alleging the same facts on which the earlier complaint was lodged. It may be noticed that the private c...
Rakesh Gupta and Another Vs. State of Ap, Rep. by Public Prosecutor an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2012
The 2nd respondent was served with notice, but no one appeared for the 2nd respondent. This petition is disposed of without hearing the 2nd respondent. The petitioners, who are the accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.274 of 2009 on the file of Mahankali Police Station, Secunderabad, seek for the quashment of the FIR. The 2nd respondent laid a complaint before the Police alleging that the petitioners have been interfering with the premises bearing Flat No.207, 2nd Floor, Chandralok Complex, Secunderabad, wherefrom the petitioners have been attempting to conduct their business. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners have been running their business in premises bearing Flat No.220, 2nd Floor, Chandralok Complex. The petitioners are partners and allegedly have been conducting business under the name and style of M/s. Appar Procon. The basic dispute thus is whether the premises is Flat No.207 or Flat No.220. This is a question of fact. I am afraid that it cannot b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »