Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Smt. Yarlagadda Sudharani Vs. M/S. Sri Laxmipriya Township Promoters P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-08-2013
Oral Order: (T. Ashok Kumar, Member) 1. This is an appeal preferred by the unsuccessful complainant as against the orders dated14.03.2012 in CC 385/2011on the file of the District Consumer Forum -1, Hyderabad. For convenience sake, the parties as arrayed in the complaint are referred to as under : 2. The brief facts of the complaint are the opposite party got registered plot nos. 276 and 277 in Sy. Nos. 183 to 193 in the year 2000 at Gandicheruvu Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District vide document No. 5774/2000 of SRO, Pedda Amberpet in the Siva Priya Nagar on payment of Rs.38,500/- during the life time of her husband though there was no layout of plots and no possession of plots was given to him. Later, they came to know that there was no layout of the plots, the OP cheated them and he also was convicted by both Trial and Sessions courts and he was on bail granted by the Honble High Court of A. P. The cause of action is continuing and recurring from the inception and as pe...
.Smt. B. Suryakanth Vs. B.S. Vidhya Sagar @ R
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-2013
THE HONOURABLE Sr.JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE S.V.BHATT A.S.No.2421 of 1998 and batch (Common Judgment) dated:08-08-2013 .Smt.B.Suryakantham .appellant B.S.Vidhya Sagar @ Raju ..Respondent. Counsel for the appellant: Sr.K.S.R.Murthy Counsel for the Respondent: Sr.Vedula Srinivas HEAD NOTE: ?.Cases referred 1) AIR2012Madras 34 2) (2006) 2 SCC5783) 1985 (Supp) SCC611THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE S.V.BHATT A.S.No.2421 of 1998 & C.M.A.No.727 of 1999 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble Sr.Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) Both the appeals are between the same parties and are filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. Hence, they are disposed of through a common judgment. The sole respondent in both the appeals filed O.S.No.119 of 1995 before the Family Court, Hyderabad, with a prayer to declare that no valid or legal marriage has taken place or is subsisting between himself and the appellant, and that the certificate...
Amit Kumar Vs. M.Shyamlal J
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-2013
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.1736 of 2014 08-08-2013 Amit Kumar JainPetitioner M.Shyamlal Jain Respondent ^Counsel for the Petitioner: Sr.Venkateshwar Varanasi ! Counsel for the respondent: Sr.S.Sridhar for Sr.P.Suryanarayana Murthy Head note: ?. Cases referred: AIR1977SC409THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.1736 of 2014 Dated 08th August, 2014 The Court made the following: ORDER: This civil revision petition arises out of order, dated 03.03.2014, in O.S.No.1743 of 2004, on the file of the learned III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad. The respondent filed the above-mentioned suit for eviction of the petitioner from the suit schedule property. During the trial, the petitioner sought to mark the deposition of the respondent given in O.S.No.751 of 2005. The petitioner was not allowed the mark the said deposition on the ground that the respondent has not satisfied the requi...
Smt Subhra Mohanta Vs. Y. Kiran Kumar, Ceo M/S SuchirIndia Developer P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2013
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member) 1. The averments of the complaint are that the opposite party started venture under the name and style of West Brook Sierra at Pulimamdi village, Kandukur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The complainant joined the scheme on 24-06-2007 and plot no.439 was allotted to him. On the same day i.e.,24.06.2007 the complainant paid the entire sale consideration of the plot, Rs.21,72,000/-.The opposite party informed the complainant that the layout of the plot was going to be approved. The official of the opposite party informed the complainant in the month of October,2008 that the layout of the plan was approved and he was requested to go to the office for the purpose of registration. 2. On 30.10.2008 the official of the opposite party informed the complainant that the layout was revised and plot number 55 was allotted to him and that plot number 55 was by the side of 40 road and the plot number 439 was adjoining 30 road and as such the complainant wa...
Nandigam Ramakrishna Rao Vs. the Branch Manager State Bank of Hyderaba ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2013
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. The respondent no.1 sanctioned a housing loan to the respondent no.2 under loan account No.62006116815 for which the respondent no.2 paid few instalments and approached the appellant and requested to purchase the complaint scheduled property which is mortgaged with the respondent No.1. In terms of due negotiations appellant has paid Rs.10,000/- on 18-09-2009, Rs.1,50,000/- on 19-09-2008, Rs.25,000/- on 05-11-2008, Rs.12,016/- on 16-11-2009, Rs.5,32,000/- on 16-11-2009 and also Rs.2,586/- on 05-03-2010 towards loan on behalf of respondent no.2 and he discharged the entire housing loan amount due by respondent no.2 to the respondent no.1. 2. The appellant requested the respondent no.1 to handed over the original documents pertaining to the said house. on 17-11-2009 the appellant demanded for delivery of original document for which the respondent no.1 informed that the respondent no.2 also avail...
Radiant Info Systems Pvt. Ltd. Rep. by Its Director and Another Vs. Sm ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2013
Oral Order: (M. Shreesha, Member) 1) Aggrieved by the order in CC No. 382/2011 on the file of the Dist. Forum-I, Hyderabad, the opposite parties preferred this appeal and along with it the above application to condone delay of 180 days in filing the appeal on the ground that no notice was served on them in the main complaint i.e., CC 382/2011 and they came to know about the complaint and the orders of the Dist. Forum when the notice was served on them in EA 3/2013. The petitioners/appellants further contended that the notices were got issued to the old address and they were not aware of the proceedings before the Dist. Forum and that an ex-parte decree was obtained by the complainant fraudulently. The petitioners/appellants contend that an application moved by them before the Dist. Forum-I, Hyderabad to set-aside the order was returned on 13.3.2013 and therefore the limitation has to be reckoned from that day and the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned in the light of aforementi...
Durgam Laxmi Vs. the Senior Divisional Manager Lic of India
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2013
Oral Order: (M. Shreesha, Member) 1) Aggrieved by the order in CC No. 52/2010 on the file of the Dist. Forum, Warangal the complainant preferred this appeal. 2) The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainants husband Mahender has obtained a policy for a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs on 31.7.2007 by paying yearly premium of Rs. 50,000/- keeping the complainant as nominee. While so, the complainants husband died on 16.12.2008 due to heart attack while undergoing treatment in NIMS Hospital, Hyderabad. When the claim was made on 31.3.2010 the opposite party repudiated it on the ground of suppression of material facts. Hence this complaint for a direction to the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs covered under the policy with interest together with compensation and costs. 3) The opposite party insurance company resisted the case. While admitting issuance of policy in the name of the deceased D. Mahender for the sum assured of Rs. 5 lakhs on 31.7.2007 the opposite part...
A. Raja Murali Vs. M/S. Singareni Collieries Company Limite
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2013
THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR Writ Petition No.20029 of 2005 Dated 07-08-2013 A. Raja Murali..Petitioner M/S.Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Godavari Khani No.1, Ramagundam Area-I, rep. by its Dy. General manager, Godavari Khani, Karimnagar District..Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Sr.N. Vijay Counsel for the Respondent: Sr.Nandigam Krishna Rao : : ?.Cases Referred: 1. 2009(3) ALD1572. 1992(2) ALT1983. 2004(3) ALD251DB) 4. 2008(6) ALD6685. 2011(2) ALD4936. (2000) 8 SCC696THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR Writ Petition No.20029 of 2005 Order: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings Ref.No.RGI/Gdk 1/W-03/04/984, dated 26.03.2004, issued by the respondent- Singareni Collieries Company Limited, determining the age of the petitioner as 25 years as on 12.01.1971 and fixing the date of superannuation as 31.01.2006, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondent-Company to rectify the same and incorporate ...
V.Subbayamma, W/O Nageswara Rao Vs. Joint Collector, Additional Distri ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2013
HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15454 of 2013 dated:07-08-2013 V.Subbayamma, W/o Nageswara Rao....Petitioner Joint Collector, Additional District Magistrate, Guntur and two others......Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sr.Challa Dhanamjaya Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Revenue : ?.CITATIONS: The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside the order in proceedings, vide Rc.No.412/2007, dated 23.04.2007, of respondent No.3, as confirmed in Assignment Appeal No.257, dated 09.07.2010 and in Case No.R..Dis.No.5041/2010/E2, dated 15.01.2013, of respondent Nos.2 and 1 respectively. I have heard Sr.Challa Dhanamjaya, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments).The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner of land admeasuring Acs.8- 25 cents in Survey No.538 (Old Survey No.498/B1) of Pottur Village, Guntur Rural Mandal and District. She traced her ...
M/S.Durgawines, A4 Shop No.02, Nizamaba Vs. Govt. of A.P.Rep., by Its ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2013
THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.21097 OF2013and batch Dated 07-08-2013 M/s.Durga Wines, A4 shop No.02, Nizamabad Town rep. by its Prop:Mr.Bantu Satyajith Reddy....Petitioner Govt. of A.P.rep., by its Secretary (Prohibition and Excise).Secretariat, Hyderabad & Ors.....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner:Sr.K.Durgaprasad Counsel for respondents: G.P.for Prohibition and Excise HEAD NOTE: ?.Citations: 1 (1975) 2 SCC482=AIR1976SC2632 (1967) 1 S.C.R.120 3 (1973) 3 SCC8894 AIR1974SC16825 1996) 4 SCC766 (1997) 116 PLR2527 (2004) 1 SCC7028 (1955) 2 SCR603= AIR1955SC6619 (1898) 2 Ch 28 10 1898 AC57111 (2004) 2 SCC112 (2004) 11 SCC2613 (2006) 4 SCC32714 (2011) 334 ITR387(AP) 15 (1996) 5 SCC26816 (2009) 14 SCC8517 (1995) 1 SCC574THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.21097, 22275, 22276, 22283 & 22318 OF2013Common Order: The question which arises for consideration, in this batch of Writ Petitions, is whether the amended Rule 28 (2) of the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »