Andhra Pradesh Court February 2013 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.
B.V. Satyanarayana and Others Vs. Person in Charge, the Bandar Co-oper ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
(Smt. M. Shreesha, Honble Incharge President) Since all the appeals deal with similar facts, they are being disposed of by a common order: Aggrieved by the orders of District Forum-I, Krishna at Machilipatnam in C.C.Nos.28/08, 65/08, 45/08, 30/08 and 29/08 the complainants preferred these appeals. The brief facts as set out in the complaints are that the complainants, had taken a loan of Rs.1,00,000/-, 1,00,000/- 60,000/-, 60,000/- and 1,00,000/- respectively from the opposite parties and discharged the said loans. The complainants submit that at the time of sanctioning of loan, they deposited the title documents with the opposite parties and after clearing the loan, they approached them several times for return of their documents but the opposite parties dragged the matter and had not handed over the documents inspite of total payment. The complainants therefore issued a notice to the opposite parties but they neither returned the documents nor replied. The complainants submit that th...
Sasanapuri Someswara Rao, Visakhapatnam Vs. Shriram Transport Finance ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
T. Ashok Kumar, Honourable Member, J. 01. These appeals are filed by the unsuccessful complainants of the above described Consumer complaints against the opposite parties. Since the opposite parties are same and common facts and law are involved, we intend to dispose of the same by common order. CC No. 38/2011 is taken as a lead case. For convenience sake the parties as arrayed in the complaint are referred to hereunder: 02. The brief facts of the compliant are as under: CC 38/2011 pertaining to FA 925/2011: 03. In order to purchase a Motor vehicle the complainant approached the opposite parties and they financed Rs.17,19,000/- in the form of a loan. Accordingly the complainant purchased vehicle bearing No. AP 31 TA 7588 and an agreement dated 01.04.2010 was entered into in the said aspects fr four years i.e., 1.4.2014. The complainant gave (6) blank cheques to the opposite parties but they did not issue copy of the said loan agreement. The said amount of Rs.17,19,000/- was t...
Sanjeet Kumar Srivastava and Others Vs. M/S Modi Shelters Pvt Ltd., by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
Oral Order: (R. Lakshmi Narasimha Rao, Member.)1. The complaint is filed seeking direction to the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.32,62,500/- with interest @ 18% per annum and a sum of Rs.10 lakh towards damages and compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and Rs.15,000/- towards costs.2. The averments of the complaint are that the complainants entered into agreement of sale on 5.9.2006 with the opposite party to purchase plot no.119 to an extent of 188 sq.yards in Sy.No.54 and 55 at Annojiguda and Sy.Nos.821 and 822 at Korremula Village, Ghatkesar Mandal R.R. District named as Emarald Park for consideration of Rs.33,02,500/-. The opposite party agreed to complete the project within 24 months from the date of agreement with grace period of six months. The complainants are due a sum of Rs.93,207/-. The time mentioned in the agreement of sale was elapsed and the project has not been completed.3. The complainants pointed out to the director of the opposite party c...
Ambuj Shukla Vs. M/S. Aashray Properties and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2013
(Smt. M. Shreesha, Honble Member) The brief facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant is presently working as Chartered Accountant in Bangalore and previously worked with Satyam Computers during 2007 and at that point of time, opposite parties approached him and offered to sell one villa in Ashreya Properties at Kandawada village, Chevalla Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in an extent of 120 acrs of land on a plot of land admeasuring 500 sq. yds. with a total built up area measuring about 3500 sq. ft. and the complainant agreed to purchasethe same at a price of 27.10 lakhs. The complainant paid a total sum of Rs.27.10 lakhs on six occasions as follows: DateCheque No.PayeeAmount Rs.21-7-2007389440O.P.3Rs.1,10,00004-8-2007291219O.P.3Rs.2,00,00026-11-20076581O.P.3Rs.2,50,00029-12-20076580O.P.1Rs.15,00,00019-2-2008164609O.P.3Rs.1,50,00022.05.20086600O.P.1Rs.5,00,000TotalRs.27,10,000The complainant submitted that an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- was paid in the name of opposite p...
A.Gopal Reddy. Vs. R.Subramanyam Reddy and Another.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5835 o22. 02.2013 A.Gopal Reddy. R.Subramanyam Reddy and another. Counsel for the petitioner: Sri T.S.Anand Counsel for respondents:Sri K.Mohan Rami Reddy HEAD NOTE: ?Cases referred: ORDER: The petitioner filed O.S.No.491 of 2011 in the Court of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor, against the respondents herein, for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of 9 cents of land in Survey No.419/9 of Ilavarapalli Village, Irala Mandal, Chittoor District. He stated that an extent of 20 cents were owned by him and out of it, he sold 11 cents to the 2nd respondent and when he was trying to construct a compound wall enclosing 9 cents separating the sold out 11 cents, the respondents started interfering. In an application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C., the trial Court is said to have passed an order of status quo. The 1st respondent herein i.e., 1st defendant filed I.A.No278 of 2012 under Order 26 Rule ...
Utkuri Ratamma and Others Vs. the Deputy Secretary Government of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE WRIT PETITION NO.9555 OF 200.22-2-2013 Utkuri Ratamma and others The Deputy Secretary Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs Freedom Fighters Division Loknayak Bhavan Khan Market New Delhi and another COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER: Sri K. Rama Krishna COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1: Mrs. K. Rajitha COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2: G.P. for Revenue GIST HEAD NOTE: ?CITATIONS:1. 1993 Supp (3) SC2. (1997) 10 SCC 28.3. (1992) 2 SCC 2.:1992. SCC (L&S4. C.A. No.7762 of 1996, dt.30.4.1996 (Judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. M.R. Chelliah Thevar) 5. (1997) 10 SCC 19.6. (2007) 9 SCC 52.ORDER:1. The petitioners who were sanctioned freedom fighters pension under "Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980" (for short 'the Scheme') by the 1st respondent filed this writ petition for a mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not granting the pension from the date of their applications under the Scheme as ille...
M. Sathaiah Vs. Choppadandi Narasimhachari and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-22-2013
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The District Forum has passed the order directing the second respondent to restore the name of the first respondent in respect of the service connection by deleting the name of M.Ramulu and for payment of sum of `500/-towards costs. 2. The appellant is third party to the proceedings and not a party to the complaint. The first respondent filed complaint praying for direction to the second respondent to restore service connection bearing number 210 in his name and for payment of compensation of `3,000/-. The case of the first respondent is that he purchased land to an extent of Ac.1.21gts in Survey No.363 from Msuhikam Sathaiah and the land admeasuring Ac.1.10gts in Survey No. 405/43,Ac.0.15gts in Survey No. 405/86 along with 5HP Electricity Motor and bore well and service connection bearing number 1270021 from Mushikam Devaiah. The first respondent got mutated the land and the service connection in the relevant records by the Reven...
S.Habeeb and Others. Vs. Smt. M.F.Shahanaz and Another.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.4443 o21. 02.2013 S.Habeeb and others. Smt. M.F.Shahanaz and another. Counsel for the petitioners: Sri S.V.Bhatt Counsel for respondents: HEAD NOTE: Cases referred: ORDER: The 3rd petitioner is the wife of late Anwar Saheb and petitioners 1 and 2 are their children. The petitioners filed O.S.No.260 of 2009 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, against the respondents herein for the relief of declaration of title, recovery of possession and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule premises. It was pleaded that late Anwar Saheb was granted patta in respect of the property and when disputes arose with the Madanapalle Municipality, he filed O.S.No.242 of 1991 in the Court of I Additional Junior civil Judge, Madanapalle. The suit is said to have been decreed and that the appeal filed by the Municipality was dismissed. The petitioners plead that after the death of Anwar Saheb, a portion of the propert...
Papasani Sankara Reddy Vs. Kandula Hanumantha Reddy and 6 Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2013
The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Civil Revision Petition No. 501 o21. 02-2013 Papasani Sankara Reddy Kandula Hanumantha Reddy and 6 others HEAD NOTE: Counsel for the petitioner : Sri V.V. Satish for Sri O. Manohar Reddy Counsel for the respondents : --- ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition arises out of order, dated 02-11-2012, in I.A. No.213 of 2012 in O.S. No.58 of 2007 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Guntakal. The petitioner filed the above mentioned suit for declaration of his right to use the main street abutting the plaint schedule property on the southern side without any let or hindrance, and for a mandatory injunction to direct the respondents/defendants to remove the respective houses constructed by them on the main street on the southern side of the plaint schedule property and not to cause any obstruction to him from using the main street. He has filed I.A. No.213 of 2012 under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short "...
Madala Rama Rao and Three Others. Vs. the District Collector,krishna D ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.5222 o21. 02.2013 Madala Rama Rao and three others. The District Collector,Krishna District at Machilipatnam and two others. Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri P.N.Murthy Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Revenue : ?CITATIONS: NIL ORDER: This is a third round of litigation pertaining to the proposed acquisition of the petitioners' lands for the purpose of providing house sites to weaker sections. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') was issued in the year 2006 in respect of Acs.4-00 of land in R.S.Nos.184/1, 271/1, 271/2, 271/3, 271/4, 271/5 and 271/7 of Angaluru Village, Gudlavalleru Mandal, Krishna District. Writ Petition No.11882 of 2006 was filed questioning the action of the respondents in dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court by order, dated 15.06.2006, by holding that no urgency was involved fo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »