Andhra Pradesh Court April 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.
P. Lavanya Vs. P. Dinesh Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA F.C.A.No.164 o08. 04-2013 P. Lavanya P. Dinesh Rao Counsel for the appellant: Sri S. Sridhar Counsel for the Respondent: Sri G. Ravichandran HEAD NOTE: ?Cases referred JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. Their marriage was solemnized on 18-11-2005. They were also blessed with a child. However, on account of differences between them, they started living separately. While the respondent is living at Secunderabad, the appellant is living at the place of her parents' in Hubli, of Karnataka State. The respondent filed O.P.No.175 of 2008 in the Family Court, Secunderabad, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), for restitution of conjugal rights. He pleaded that the appellant left his company without any basis, and as long as the marriage is subsisting, he is entitled to have the company of the appellant. The...
M/S. Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd., Rep. by Its Manager Vs. K. Ganesh and An ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member) 1. The opposite parties are the appellants. The respondent filed the complaint seeking for furnishing of the statement of account in respect of his loan account no.400210124, direction to the second respondent not to entertain any application for transfer of the Bajaj Chrome motor cycle, direction to the appellant to pay an amount of Rs.200/- per day till the vehicle is returned and Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for suffering mental tension. 2. The first respondent availed loan an amount of Rs.25,000/- from the appellant for purchase of Bajaj Chrome Motor Cycle bearing registration number AP-29E-75058 against hypothecation agreement. The first respondent paid an amount of Rs.35,500/- till 7.2.2010 towards the EMIs. The appellant repossessed the vehicle on 28.02.2011 and sold the vehicle on 25.03.2011. 3. The version of the first respondent is that the appellant has not furnished him copy of the hypothecation agreement; without extending ...
Lagudu Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Vs. Shirram Life Insurance Co.Ltd., ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member) 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. He filed complaint claiming for refund of Rs.25,000/- with interest and a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards damages and Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation. 2. The facts of the case as seen from the complaint are that the appellant deposited an amount of Rs.25,000/- with the respondent on 31.1.2008 under Life Insurance Scheme Sree Vikas with the respondent and the respondent issued receipt No.9018706 dated 3.1.2008. The respondents had not issued insurance bond within three months from the date of deposit of the amount. The appellant got issued notice on 3.12.2009 requesting for issue of the insurance bond and thereafter filed the complaint. 3. The respondents resisted the claim on the premise that the District Forum has no jurisdiction and the appellant is not a consumer as also that the appellants submitted two proposals in the month of April 2008 in proposal form no.124808000017 the appellant ...
Smt. Tubati Jyoshna Vs. Shriram Transport Finance Co.Ltd., Rep. by Its ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member) 1. The facts beyond any dispute are that the appellant had been letting her bus on hire to RTC and the RTC required her on 28.5.2007 to replace the bus with a new bus and for purchase of the new bus, she availed loan from the respondent to an extent of Rs.11,50,000/-. The amount repayable according to the appellant is Rs.16,80,000/- whereas according to the respondent the amount repayable is Rs.16,92,000/-. It is not disputed that the appellant got insured the bus with M/s Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co., Ltd., and on 18.5.2009 the bus met with an accident at Kandripadu village and the appellant got repaired the bus. 2. The learned counsel for the respondent has contended that the appellant purchased the bus for transport business for the purpose of earning profit and the complaint, as such is not maintainable. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has not been doing transport business with the bus and it is the...
Union of India and Another. Vs. Ashok Narayan Paldhe and Others.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Appeal Suit No.3504 o04. 04.2013 Union of India and another. Ashok Narayan Paldhe and others. Counsel for appellants: Sri Ponnam Ashok Goud Counsel for Respondents : Sri Sunil Ganu HEAD NOTE: ?Cases referred 2004 (1) ALD 1.JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice L.Narasimha Reddy) This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree, dated 12.04.2004, passed by the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, in O.S.No.90 of 1997. Respondents 1 and 2 filed the suit and the appellants figured as defendants 3 and 2 therein. While the 3rd respondent figured as 1st defendant, respondents 4 to 8 were arrayed as defendants 4 to 8. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as arrayed in the suit. Plaintiffs are the parents of one Sri Amar Ashok Paldhe. He was recruited as Seaman-I, Clearance Diver not III, and in the year 1993, he was in the Eastern Naval Command Clearance Diving Sch...
FaheemuddIn Ahmed S/O. Late Rafique Ahme Vs. Farzana Abedi W/O.Syed Ri ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2013
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4442 o04. 04-2013 Faheemuddin Ahmed S/o. Late Rafique Ahmed and others Farzana Abedi W/o.Syed Riazuddin Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri S. Balchand Counsel for the Respondent: Sri A. Sameer Kumar : ?Cases referred: ORDER: The petitioners are tenants of residential premises at Chanchalguda, Hyderabad, owned by the respondent. R.C. No.323 of 2003 was filed by the respondent before the II Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, for eviction of the petitioners by citing reasons of wilful default in payment of rent from April, 2001 onwards and bona fide requirement. It was mentioned that the respondent is residing in Saudi Arabia, and taking advantage of the same, the petitioners failed and refused to pay the rents to authorized person. It was also stated that the respondent used to come to India frequently, and used to stay for a considerable time and when she informed the petitioners that the premises are needed for her ...
State Bank of India,stressed Assets Mana Vs. M/S.Monarch Pipes Limited ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR COMPANY APPLICATION NO.1074 OF 2006and batch 04-04-2013 State Bank of India,Stressed Assets Management Branch,near HPO, Secunderabad, represented by its Deputy General Manager. M/s.Monarch Pipes Limited, represented by its Provisional Liquidator,(Official Liquidator), High Court of A.P.,Hyderabad, and others. HEAD NOTE: Counsel for Petitioners: Sri M.Narender Reddy Sri M.Anil Kumar, Counsel for Official Liquidator. ^Counsel for responden: Sri M.Anil Kumar, Counsel for Official Liquidator, Sri P.Badri Premnath, Sri Ram Reddy, Sri T.Sharath. CASES REFERRED:1. (1962) 32 COMP CAS 82.2. (1964) 2 COMPANY LAW JOURNAL 6 3. (1987) 3 SCC 58.4. (2002) 112 COMP CAS 60.5. AIR 199.MADRAS 2 6. (1966) 36 COMP CAS 21.7. (1978) 2 SCC 66.8. (2007) 8 SCC 77.9. (2011) 1 SCC 11.COMPANY APPLICATION NO.1074 OF 2006.COMPANY APPLICATION NO.264 OF 201.IN COMPANY APPLICATION NO.1074 OF 200.AND COMPANY APPLICATION NO.1881 OF 201.IN RCC NO.2 OF 200.C O M M O N ORDER C.A.No.1074...
Nandam Rama Rao, S/O.Dasaradha Ramaiah Vs. Battu Rama Rao, S/O.Late Ya ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 4280 OF 201.04.04.2013 Nandam Rama Rao, S/o.Dasaradha Ramaiah Battu Rama Rao, S/o.late Yallari Counsel for the petitioner:Sri V.S.R.Anjaneyulu Counsel for respondent: Ms. Manchikalapati Renuka : ?Cases referred:1. (2001) 10 SCC 61.2) AIR 198.SC 141.3) 1998(4) ALT 8.ORDER: This Revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the Order dated 18.08.2010 in I.A.No.711 of 2009 in A.S.No.14 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tenali. The petitioner is the defendant in a suit filed by the respondent against him for recovery of money on the basis of three promissory notes. The suit was dismissed and challenging the same, the respondent/plaintiff filed A.S.No.14 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tenali. In the said appeal, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.711 of 2009 under Order 41 Rule 27 of C.P.C. r/w Section 151 of C.P.C. seeking permission of the Court...
Kulukulri Suresh Varma Vs. V.Venkata Satya Subrahmanya Mallikarjuna
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2013
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.1532 o04. 04-2013 Kulukulri Suresh Varma V.Venkata Satya Subrahmanya Mallikarjuna Surya Rao and others HEAD NOTE: Counsel for petitioner : Sri Ravi Cheemalapati Counsel for respondents 1 to 4 : Sri T.D. Phani Kumar ?CASES REFERRED : ORDER: Respondents 1 to 4 filed O.S.No.114 of 2011 in the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Bheemunipatnam, against the petitioner and the 5th respondent, for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. The suit was decreed on 05.11.2011 and the decree is said to have become final. The respondents 1 to 4 filed E.P.No.24 of 2012, under Order XXI Rule 32 of CPC, with a prayer to send the petitioner and the 5th respondent to civil prison on the ground that they violated the decree for perpetual injunction. It was pleaded that the petitioner brought into existence a structure over the suit schedule property, part of a plot of 377 square yards of site. 2. The pe...
The Life Insurance Corporation of India, Miryalguda Branch, Miryalguda ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2013
Oral Order: (T. Ashok Kumar, Member ) 1. This is an appeal preferred by the opposite parties as against the orders dated 17.02.2012 in CC 97/2011 on the file of the District Consumer Forum at Nalgonda. For convenience sake, the parties as arrayed in the complaint are referred to as under : 2. The brief facts of the complaint are that the husband of the Complainant by name Chinthareddy Ramanuja Reddy, who was the Sarpanch of Dharmapuram Village of Nidmanoor Mandal, obtained Insurance policy bearing No.603746898 for an assured sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with double accidental benefit. Her husband was murdered on 10.08.2009 and the police Nalgonda (Rural) registered a case in Cr.No.139/2009. When she made a claim, the Ops paid Rs. Two lakhs but repudiated the claim under Double Accident Benefit on the ground that the life assured was killed by others due to rivalry and not murder by accident and hence it cannot be treated as an accident and that the said allegation is incorrect and that repudia...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »