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.
Methuku Ravindranath Vs. Sure Krishnamurthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2013
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Second Appeal No.1587 o18. 02.2013 Methuku Ravindranath Sure Krishnamurthy Counsel for appellant: Sri S.V.Bhatt Counsel for Respondent : Sri J.Ugra Narasimha HEAD NOTE: ?Cases referred JUDGMENT: The appellant is the sole plaintiff in O.S.No.12 of 2005 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Punganur. He filed the suit against the respondent for recovery of Rs.1,84,732/-, on the basis of a promissory note said to have been executed by the respondent on 01.07.2000. It was pleaded that the respondent borrowed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, on that date, agreeing to repay the amount, with interest at 18%, per annum. It was also pleaded that the respondent made part payment of a sum of Rs.5,000/- , on 21.05.2003, and made an endorsement on the reverse of the promissory note. The appellant stated that though he got issued a notice, on 30.05.2005, the amount was not repaid by the respondent. The respondent filed a written statement, denying the very allegation...
M/S. Gayatri Associates Rep. by Its Managing Partner P. Vishweshwar Vs ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2013
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The petitioner/opposite party no.1 preferred the appeal against the order of the Dist. Forum directing the opposite parties to refund `6,85,000/- with interest, compensation of `5,000/- and costs of `2,000/- along with it filed the above application u/s 15 of the Consumer Protection Act to condone delay of 353 days. 2. It is averred in the petition that the Dist. Forum has erroneously directed it to pay the amount with interest, compensation and costs though no notices were served on the petitioner firm in C.C.No.222 of 2011. The District Forum has ordered substituted service by way of publication in the newspaper Neti Manadesham which is an unknown and obscure newspaper and as such the petitioner could not notice the same and appeared before the District Forum. Subsequently after passing of the order the respondent no.1 filed E.A.No.15 of 2012 for execution of the order. However on 8.8.2012 due to ill health the counsel for the p...
Dr. Eunice L Chawngthu Vs. Dell India Private Limited and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2013
Oral Order: (Sri R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. She filed complaint seeking for refund of `28,000/- i.e., the cost of laptop and damages to the extent of `4,98,000/-. 2. The case of the appellant a seen from the averments fo the complaint is that she purchased DELL VOSTRO 1510 Laptop from the respondent through Atlasoft of Secunderabad on 18.5.2010 for which the respondent had issued purchase bill. The appellant reported complaint in regard to functioning of the laptop on 27.9.2010 and non-functioning of DVD player through to Atlasoft of Secunderabad. On 29.9.2010 the technician of the respondent company repaired the laptop and noted that the start button was uneven, not closed properly, right side keypads were not functioning, Bluetooth was switched off and cursor was not functioning. 3. On complaint of the appellant, the engineer of the respondent company checked the laptop on 1.10.2010 and rectified Bluetooth problem. The ap...
National Insurance Company Limited, Represented by Its Divisional Mana ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2013
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The opposite party no.1 is the appellant. 2. The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is the husband of Jala Sarada who died on 25-01-2006 due to accidental drowning. Jala Sarada who is the wife of the complainant joined as a member in the scheme introduced by the opposite party No.3. She obtained Group Janata Personal Accident Insurance Policy bearing No.100300/47/01/9600022/04/96/30022 issued by opposite party No.1 and the sum assured under the policy is Rs.5,00,000/-. The policy was in force from 15-04-2004 to 14-04-2009. The complainant is the nominee under the policy. The complainants wife died due to accidental drowning on 25-01-2006 while the policy was in force. After the death of Jala Sarada the complainant who is the nominee under the policy submitted F.I.R., Inquest, Post Mortem Certificate, Death Certificate and the copy of the policy to opposite party No.2. On 29-03-2006, 04-04-2006 and 16-05-2996 ...
Somisetti Bala Srinivasa Rao Vs. the Chief Manager, Indian Bank, R.R. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2013
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.30450 o15. 2-2013 Somisetti Bala Srinivasa Rao The Chief Manager, Indian Bank, R.R. Pet, Eluru,West Godavari District and another HEAD NOTE: Counsel for petitioner : Sri M. Suryanarayana Counsel for respondents : Sri Ambadipudi Satyanarayana CASES REFERRED: (1992) 2 SCC 33.The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to renew the loan account of the petitioner and permit one year's time to clear off the dues under all his loan accounts. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The petitioner is one of the partners of the two partnership firms by names M/s.Manasa Lakshmi Trading Company and M/s. Mahalakshmi Enterprises. M/s. Manasa Lakshmi Trading Co. was granted C.C. limit of Rs.150 lakhs and Rs.31.50 lakhs under O.C.C. limit and M/s. Mahalakshmi Enterprises was granted Rs.20.85 lakhs and Rs.19.50 lakhs towards term loans and Rs.22 lakhs to...
M/S. Chandu Financiers, Chittoor, Rep. B Vs. G.Ramakrishna Naidu and A ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2013
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Second Appeal No.49 o15. 02.2013 M/s. Chandu Financiers, Chittoor, rep. by its foreman Y.Raghu. G.Ramakrishna Naidu and another Counsel for appellant: Sri Mehar Chand Noori Counsel for Respondents : Sri Sumanth HEAD NOTE: Cases referred 1. 1999 (6) ALT 68.2. (1999) 9 SCC 11.3. (1989) 3 SCC 47.JUDGMENT: The plaintiff in O.S.No.1238 of 1999 on the file of the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor, is the appellant. The appellant is a Partnership Firm, and it filed the suit against the respondents for recovery of amount covered by a chit transaction. While the 1st respondent was the prized subscriber, the 2nd respondent is the guarantor. It was pleaded that the appellant started chits in Group No.7 of the value of Rs.50,000/-, of the duration of 20 months with monthly subscription of Rs.2,500/-. 1st respondent subscribed to one of the chits and became successful bidder in August, 1995. He stated that having received the prize amount of Rs.33,...
Jingulaiah Subramanyam Naidu Vs. Jingulaiah Venkatesulu Naidu (Died)an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2013
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY SECOND APPEAL No.1195 OF 201.15-02-2013 Jingulaiah Subramanyam Naidu Jingulaiah Venkatesulu Naidu (died)and others Counsel for the Appellant:Sri K. Rama Mohan Mahadeva Counsel for the Respondents:None : ?Cases referred: JUDGMENT: The appellant filed O.S. No.60 of 1985 in the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Chittoor, against the respondents for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. It was pleaded that the 1st respondent Jingulaiah Venkatesulu Naidu, was acting as Karta of Joint Family and taking advantage of his position, he purchased various items of lands in the name of his wife and the wives of his brothers. The appellant stated that inspite of repeated requests, the respondents did not divide the suit schedule property. The suit was resisted by the respondents by stating inter alia, that once the properties are in the names of persons, other than the coparceners, no relief of partition c...
P.N.S. Praka Vs. the Secretary to Govt. of A.P. Legislati
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.6347 o15. 02-2013 P.N.S. Prakash....Petitioner The Secretary to Govt. of A.P. Legislative Affairs & Justice, Law Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and five others....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Gade Venkateswara Rao Counsel for respondents : G.P. for Home Sri K. Ramamohan Mahadeva HEAD NOTE: ?Citations:1. (2011) 4 SC2. AIR 197.Madra3. (1951) 342 US 9.4) (2003) 4 SCC 57.5) (1988) 4 SCC 5.6) (1996) 2 Crime7. (1964) 3 SCR 397.AIR 196.SC 32.8) 1986 CriLJ 38.9) AIR 198.SC 19.10) AIR 200.Bom.431 11) (1995 CriLJ 314.12) AIR 196.SC 29.13) (1977) 1 SCC 13.14) (2001) 3 SCC 64.15) (1990(4) SCC 35.16) (2007(2) SCJ 14.17) (AIR 196.SC 70.18) 2008 (2) ALT 42.19) 1994(1) PLJR 56 (DB 20.(1993) 3 SCC 55.21) (1989) 4 SCC 31.22) (2003) 3 SCC 32.23) AIR 196.SC 38.24) AIR 196.SC 191.25) Judgment in W.P.No.15548 of 2008 dated 30.7.2008 26) (1997(2) ALD (Cri.) 502 (SC) 27) AIR 196.117 28) 2004 (2) ALD Cri 935) (SC 29.(1...
P.Murthy Yadav Vs. the Government of A.P. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3147 o15. 02-2013 P.Murthy Yadav The Government of A.P. and others Counsel for the petitioner: Sri N.Ravi Prasad Counsel for Respondents:G.P. for School Education : ?Citations: ORDER: Petitioner claims to be the General Secretary of I.N.T.U.C. Young Workers Council. According to him, he is taking up social activities and highlighted various irregularities. It is also stated that he is the President of Visakha Municipal Corporation Employees & Workers Union, Rajiv Time Scale Employees Union of Andhra University and Priyadarshini NMR Employees Union, Andhra University. He contends that Andhra University is without Vice- Chancellors from August, 2007 onwards, and the In-charge Vice Chancellor and in particular, the 5th respondent herein, have been taking major decisions contrary to the provisions of law. He made specific allegations against the 5th respondent. According to him, attempts were made by respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 ...
S. Alisher Vs. the Assistant Engineer Apspdcl and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2013
Oral Order: (Sri R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. He filed complaint seeking direction to the respondents to pay a sum of `75,000/- towards compensation and `25,000/- towards damages as also costs. 2. The case of the appellant as seen from the contents of the complaint is that he obtained electricity connection under HTSC CD No.CDP 1119 for his business firm, M/s Decent Metal Crushing Works at Muddalur village in Kadapa District. The appellant paid the bill dated 11.10.2010 a sum of `27,349/-and in the bill the arrears is shown as zero. The respondents issued notice dated13.12.2010 demanding for an amount of `49,944/-payable on or before 26.12.2010.On being requested, the first respondent orally assured the appellant that he can pay the consumption charges of `24,626/-, the appellant paid the amount. 3. The respondents issued notice dated 11.12.2011 demanding consumption charges of `24,714/- and arrears of `1,21,791/- to be paid ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »