Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
Mudapaka Malleswarao ( Died Per Lrs.) Vs. Chenchbinada Satyavathi and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO AS NO.324 OF 199.25-9-2012 Mudapaka Malleswarao ( died per LRs.) Chenchbinada Satyavathi and others Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri A. Raja Sekhara Reddy. Counsel for Respondents: : : Cases referred: Judgment: This appeal is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.25 of 1986 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Peddapuram against the judgment and decree dated 29-9-1993 passed by the said Court. Defendant No.1 is the elder sister of the plaintiff, defendant no.2 is the daughter of defendant 1 and defendants 3 to 5 are the grand sons of D.1. The suit was filed by the plaintiff to declare his title to the plaint A and B Schedule property, for possession of the same after evicting the defendants therefrom, to direct the defendants 1 and 2 to render account of ( a) the amount of Rs.500/- received by defendant no.1 in respect of the plaint C schedule property ; (b) for the amount allegedly sent by the plaintiff to the defendant no.1; (c) fo...
Thirumala theatre, Khammam, Rep. by Its Vs. Government of A.P., Rep. b ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY W.P.Nos.20656 of 2012 and Batch 25.09.2012 Thirumala Theatre, Khammam, rep. by its Partner & others. Government of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department & others. For the petitioners: Sri S.Niranjan Reddy, Advocate. For Respondents: Sri N.Sridhar Reddy, Spl. Govt. Pleader. : ?CITATIONS:1. AIR 198.AP 7.2. 1970 (2) SCC 74.3. AIR 196.SC 108.4. 1999 (5) ALD 69.5. (1999) 3 SCC 42.6. (1991) 2 SCC 4.7. AIR 196.SC 55.(1) 8. AIR 199.SC 151.9. AIR 198.SC 52.10. (2011) 12 SCC 1.11. (2009) 12 SCC 32.12. (2011) 6 SCC 71.C/15 (WRIT PETITION Nos.20656, 20658 & 20661 of 2011 and 3785 of 2012) COMMON ORDER : In this batch of cases, the petitioners have questioned the validity of the orders passed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.181, Home (General- Administration) Department, dated 11.07.2011. By the aforesaid order, the 1st respondent-Government, in exercise of powers under A.P. Cinemas (Regulation) Act of 1955 (Act 4 of 1955), has fixed ...
M/S. Suryalok Film Factory Vs. R. Malleshwari and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2012
Common Judgment: (Pinaki Chandra Ghose, ACJ.) Since the issue involved in the writ appeals and the writ petitions being the same, they are disposed of by this common judgment. The writ appeals are filed by the appellant/respondent No.4 aggrieved by the interim orders dated 3.9.2012 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge in W.P.M.P. Nos. 32956 of 2012 and 33929 of 2012 in Writ Petition No. 25856 of 2012 and 26622 of 2012 respectively, whereby the Hon’ble Single Judge restrained respondent No.4/the appellant herein and official respondents from releasing the film titled as “Sorry Teacher” pursuant to the Certification made in UA/DIL/2/13/2012/HYD, dated 16.7.2012, pending further orders. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, we are disposing of the writ petitions, being Writ Petition Nos. 25856 of 2012 and 26622 of 2012 also along with the writ appeals. Learned counsel for the appellant firstly contends that the film is not yet released and all the ...
Appikatla Imanyalu @ Immanuel Vs. State of A.P. and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2012
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash FIR in Crime No.486 of 2011 of Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the first respondent/State. Though served with notice, none appeared for the second respondent/de facto complainant. 3. The brief facts of the case which are sought to be quashed are that the marriage of the second respondent/de facto complainant with the petitioner/accused was performed on 28.04.1980 and the couple blessed with two children. According to the second respondent, at the time of marriage an amount of Rs.25,000/- was paid as dowry to the petitioner besides gifting one acre of land by the parents of the second respondent. It is alleged that the petitioner used to harass the second respondent with a view to obtain divorce and to marry another lady, so as to get more dowry. With these allegat...
M/S. Suryalok Film Factory, Mumbai. Vs. R. Malleshwari and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2012
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.A.Nos.1128 of 2012 and Batch 24-09-2012 M/s. Suryalok Film Factory, Mumbai. R. Malleshwari and others. Counsel for Appellant: Mr. K. Durga Prasad Counsel for Respondent No.1: M. Rajender Reddy Counsel for Respondent No. 2: G.P. for Home Counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4: B. Mayur Reddy HEAD NOTE: Cases referre1970. 2) SCC 78.2 (1980) 1 SCC 4.3 (1996) 4 SC4. (2006) 8 SCC 43.5 2006(4) ALD 37.6 2012(2) ALD 44.Writ Appeal Nos.1128 and 1129 of 2012 And Writ Petition Nos. 25856 of 2012 and 26622 of 2012 Common Judgment: (per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sri Pinaki Chandra Ghose) Since the issue involved in the writ appeals and the writ petitions being the same, they are disposed of by this common judgment. The writ appeals are filed by the appellant/respondent No.4 aggrieved by the interim orders dated 3.9.2012 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in W.P.M.P. Nos. 32956 of...
M/S. Suryalok Film Factory, Mumbai Vs. R. Malleshwari and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2012
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Writ Appeal Nos.1128 & 1129 of 2012 And Writ Petition Nos. 25856 of 2012 & 26622 o24. 09-2012 M/s. Suryalok Film Factory, Mumbai R. Malleshwari and others Counsel for Appellant : Mr. K. Durga Prasad Counsel for Respondent No.1 : M. Rajender Reddy Counsel for Respondent No. 2: G.P. for Home Counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4: B. Mayur Reddy HEAD NOTE: Cases referre1970. 2) SCC 78.2 (1980) 1 SCC 4.3 (1996) 4 SC4. (2006) 8 SCC 43.5 2006(4) ALD 37.6 2012(2) ALD 44.Common Judgment: (per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sri Pinaki Chandra Ghose) Since the issue involved in the writ appeals and the writ petitions being the same, they are disposed of by this common judgment. The writ appeals are filed by the appellant/respondent No.4 aggrieved by the interim orders dated 3.9.2012 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in W.P.M.P. Nos. 32956 of 2012 and 33929 of 2012 in Writ Petit...
P. Bhaskara Rao Vs. Wolfgang Ormeloh and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
Common order : 1) These Revision Petitions are connected arising out of the same suit between the same parties and involve common facts and law. Hence the revision petitions are disposed of by this common order. 2) The petitioner herein is the plaintiff and respondents 1 and 2 herein are defendant Nos.2 and 3 in O.S.No.354 of 2006 on the file of the III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Defendant No.2 (respondent No.1 herein) is the Managing Director of defendant No.3 (respondent No.2 herein) Company. Respondent No.3 herein viz., P.Surya Prakash, Company Secretary, is defendant No.1 in the suit. 3) For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred by their status in the suit. 4) The plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit bearing O.S.No.354 of 2006 claiming from the defendants Rs.20,00,000/- as damages for defamation alleging that the defendants made false allegations and claims against the plaintiff. The defendants 2 and 3 (Respondents 1 and 2) were set ex par...
K.B. Swamy Vs. the Labour Court-i, Hyderabad and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
This Writ Petition is preferred challenging that portion of the Award dated 16.10.2002 passed by the Labour Court-I, Hyderabad in I.D.No. 235 of 1999 raised by the petitioner herein, which denied him the benefit of back wages, continuity of service and other attendant benefits. The case of the petitioner is that he was recruited to the service of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) as a conductor some time during 1986 and he had maintained good record of service till the Depot Manager, Falaknuma Depot of APSRTC passed orders on 12.04.1999, imposing the punishment of removal from service. It is stated that on 19.01.1999, he was conducting a bus of the APSRTC plying on route No. 85J on the city outskirts. A check was conducted by the checking officials between stage Nos. 4 and 5, at about 11.15 a.m. and they have noticed two passengers alighting from the bus and when questioned, those two passengers have informed that they paid the necessary fare to the conductor...
K.B. Swamy Vs. the Labour Court-i, Hyderabad and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P. No. 12636 o21. 09.2012 K.B. Swamy The Labour Court-I, Hyderabad & another Counsel for the petitioner: Sri A.K. Jayaprakash Rao Counsel for Respondent No.1 : GP for Labour Counsel for Respondent No.2 : Sri C. Sunil Kumar Reddy HEAD NOTE: ?Cases referred ORDER : This Writ Petition is preferred challenging that portion of the Award dated 16.10.2002 passed by the Labour Court-I, Hyderabad in I.D.No. 235 of 1999 raised by the petitioner herein, which denied him the benefit of back wages, continuity of service and other attendant benefits. The case of the petitioner is that he was recruited to the service of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) as a conductor some time during 1986 and he had maintained good record of service till the Depot Manager, Falaknuma Depot of APSRTC passed orders on 12.04.1999, imposing the punishment of removal from service. It is stated that on 19.01.1999, he was conducting a bus of the A...
P.Bhaskara Rao Vs. Mr.Wolfgang Ormeloh, Managing Director and
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI C.R.P.Nos.3404 of 2010 and Batch 21.09.2012 P.Bhaskara Rao Mr.Wolfgang Ormeloh, Managing Director & CEO, Alumeco India Extrusion Limited, and another Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Y.Ratnakar Counsel for the Respondents 1 and 2: Mrs.Sangeeta Bhaskar : ?Citations:NIL C.R.P. Nos.3404, 3405 and 3406 of 2010 COMMON ORDER :1. These Revision Petitions are connected arising out of the same suit between the same parties and involve common facts and law. Hence the revision petitions are disposed of by this common order. 2) The petitioner herein is the plaintiff and respondents 1 and 2 herein are defendant Nos.2 and 3 in O.S.No.354 of 2006 on the file of the III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Defendant No.2 (respondent No.1 herein) is the Managing Director of defendant No.3 (respondent No.2 herein) Company. Respondent No.3 herein viz., P.Surya Prakash, Company Secretary, is defendant No.1 in the suit. 3) For the sake of convenience,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »