Andhra Pradesh Court January 2014 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.
Boddakayala Surya Prakasa Rao and Two Ot Vs. Kolaparti Rajendra Prasad ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2014
HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3212 of 2012 31-01-2014 Boddakayala Surya Prakasa Rao and two others Petitioners/Petitioners/Plaintiffs.Kolaparti Rajendra Prasad and five others Respondents/Respondents/Defendants.Counsel for the Revision Petitioners:Sr.Ravi Cheemalapati Counsel for the respondents :Sr.G. Rama Gopal for respondents No.1, 2&5 None appeared for Respondent Nos.3 & 6 : ?. Cases referred: 2010 (4) ALD490HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3212 OF2012ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the Revision Petitioners against the order dated 11.06.2012 of the Junior Civil Judge, Srungavarapukota, in dismissing the miscellaneous application filed under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short the CPC) by the revisions petitioners-plaintiffs on account of the objections taken by the respondents-defendants even at the stage of numbering the Interlocutory Application vide G.R.No.895 in O...
Sahel Rab Vs. Mohammed Salman Murtaza and Anot
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2014
HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRL.PMP No.9293 of 2013 31-01-2014 Sahel Rabiani.Petitioner/Complainant Mohammed Salman Murtaza and another. Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sr.Raja Gopallavan Tayi Counsel for Respondent No.1: Sr.O.Kailashnath Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.2 Addl.Public Prosecutor. : : ?.Cases referred: 1. 2013 (2) ALD (Crl.) 916 (AP) THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.9293 OF2013IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7734 OF2013ORDER: Heard Sr.Rajagopalavan Tayi learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/de facto complainant, Sr.K.Chandra Reddy represen Miss.Sahel Rabiani the de facto complainant herein who is an Iranian National came down to India in the year 2005 for highe With the aforesaid facts, she lodged the report in III-Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam on 16-7-2013. Basing on her repor Her counsel in Criminal Petition No.7734 of 2013 was Smt.G.Sangeetha Reddy of Andhra Pradesh High Court Advocates Associatio Now, the ...
M/S.Mangal Precisionproductlimited, H Vs. 1. A.Muthyalaiah, S/O Latemu ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NOS.1267 OF2012AND BATCH3001-2014 M/s. Mangal Precision Product Limited, having its registered office at Karakambadi village,Renugunta Mandal, Chittoor District represented by its Chairman Sri G.Ramachandra Naidu,S/o G. Gangula Naidu, R/o Petamitta Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District .. Appellant 1. A. Muthyalaiah, S/o Late Munaswamy, Aged about 50 years, R/o. T. Rangtampet village, H/o Thenepalle village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District.2. A. Mogileeswaran, S/o Late A. Munirathnam, Aged about 28 years, R/o T. Rangtampet village, H/o Thenepalle Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District 3. A. Ramakka, W/o Late Munaswamy, aged about 72 Years, R/o T. Rangtampet Village, H/o Thenepalle Village, Puthalapattu Mandal, Chittoor District.4. N. Venkataramanaiah, S/o N. Munichengaiah, aged About 64 years, R/o T. Rangtampet Village, H/o Thenepalle Village, Puthalapa...
N.Shan Vs. K.Devagiri and 2othe
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.501 OF200730-01-2014 N.Shankar...Appellant K.Devagiri and 2 others... Respondents Counsel for the Appellant : Sri P.Gangarami Reddy Counsel for the Respondent No.3: Mr.Ravishankar Jandhyala : : ?.Cases referred:1. 2009 ACJ12982. (2001) 8 SCC197HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.501 OF2007JUDGMENT: The unsuccessful claimant preferred this appeal having been aggrieved by the Order/Award of the learned Chairman of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal- cum-I Additional District Judge, Mahabubnagar, (for short, 'Tribunal') in M.V.O.P.No.338 of 2004 dated 28.12.2006, dismissing the claim petition against his claim of Rs.1,25,000/-(Rupees one lakh twenty five thousand only), in the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act').2. Heard Sri P.Gangarami Reddy, the learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.A.Jayanthi, learned standing counsel for the 3rd respondent. Notice to respon...
K.Ram Redd Vs. the Government Ofandhra Pradesh Rep. by
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.2063 of 2014 30-01-2014 K.Ram Reddy ....Petitioner The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary and others..Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sr.Ch.Ravinder Counsel for Respondents: Government Pleader for Transport : : ?.Cases referred: THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.2063 of 2014 ORDER: The writ petitioner herein seeks a writ of mandamus for declaring the seizure of the petitioner's vehicle bearing No.AP29B3129vide vehicle check report No.730557 dated 17.12.2013 issued by the Assistant Motor Vehicles Inspector, 3rd respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary and unjust. Heard Sr.Ch.Ravinder, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Government Pleader for Transport, who has accepted notice on behalf of the respondents herein. It is agreed by both sides that the writ petition can be disposed of at this stage itself. Sr.Ch.Ravinder, learned counsel for the petitione...
Southernpower Distributioncompany of a Vs. A.P. Statehuman Rights Comm ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Sr.KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HONOURABLE Sr.JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.22658 of 2011 30-01-2014 Southern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd., Tirupathi..Petitioner A.P.State Human Rights Commission, Hyderabad, represented by its Secretary and another..Respondents COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER: Sr.P.Vinod Kumar COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1: None appeared COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2: M/s Indus Law Firm GIST HEAD NOTE: ?.CITATIONS: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Sr.KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR W.P.No.22658 of 2011 ORDER: (per Hon'ble the Chief Justice Sr.Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta ) Pursuant to our order dated 23.01.2014, original record relating to this case has been sent by the Andhra Pradesh State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission').We have minutely checked up the record and we wish to record our observations hereunder. Since no counter-affidavit has been filed by any of the party ...
G.Venkate Vs. Mohammed Shareef Andanother
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.687 OF200730-01-2014 G.Venkatesh....Appellant Mohammed Shareef and another .... Respondents Counsel for the Appellant : Sri C.Vikram Chandra Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : Smt.I.Mamu Vani : : ?.Cases referred: HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.687 OF2007JUDGMENT: The unsuccessful claimant filed this appeal having been aggrieved by the Order/Award of the learned Chairman of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, (for short, 'Tribunal') in M.V.O.P.No.1872 of 2001 dated 21.07.2006, dismissing the claim petition against his claim of Rs.70,000/-(Rupees seventy thousand only), in the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act').2. Heard Sri C.Vikram Chandra, the learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.I.Maamu Vani, learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent. Notice to the 1st respondent sent called absent, t...
M/S. Sri Krishna Abhyudya Constructions, Rep. by Smt. A. Annupama Redd ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
T. Ashok Kumar, Member This is an appeal preferred by the opposite parties against the order in C.C.No.80/2011 dated 18-1-2013 on the file of District Forum, Rangareddy. For convenience sake the parties as arrayed in the complaint are referred to hereunder: The brief facts of the complaint are as under: The complainant, a registered Association of flat owners, of œSai Annapurna Residency? situated at Plot Nos.1 and 10 admeasuring 679.87 sq. yds. in Sy.No.38/3 (Old Sy.No.23 and 24) bearing Municipal No.3-9-8 (Old H.No.9-8) situated at Sharada Nagar, Ramanthapur has been registered vide registration No.175/2011. According to the complainant there are 14 flats in the apartment and they purchased flats therein between the period 2005 to 2007 under the bonafide belief that the Opposite Parties 1 to 4 are the owners and builders and they erected the apartment after obtaining prior construction permission from appropriate authorities and took possession of their respective flats but the...
Nakka Sujatha Vs. Dr. V. Rama Devi
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
Oral Order: (S. Bhujanga Rao, Member) This appeal is directed against the order dt.14.02.2012 of the District Forum, Karimnagar in I.A.No.112/2011 in C.C.No.174/2010. The opposite party in C.C.No.174/2010 filed I.A.No.112/2011 praying to dismiss the complaint as barred by limitation. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in the complaint. The brief case of the complainant as set out in the complaint is as follows: On 22.07.2007 the complainant was admitted in Dr.Bhoom Reddys Hospital, Karimnagar for delivery and she delivered a female child. The complainant developed postpartum haemorrhage and was treated by the opposite party conservatively. The opposite party without valid consent of the complainant, performed abdominal hysterectomy and sutured at about 10.00 p.m. on 22.7.2007. Even after performing abdominal hysterectomy for the complainant, as the bleeding from sutured site did not stop, the opp.party referred the complainant to Yashoda Hospital Secunder...
Dodda Venkateswarlu Vs. the Deputy General Manager(Lpg) Indian Oil Cor ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
Oral Order: (Gopala Krishna Tamada, President) 1) The un-successful complainant in CC 105/2011 before the Dist. Forum,Khammamis the appellant herein, and he assailed the order of the Dist. Forum dt. 25.3.2013 whereby the Dist. Forum refused to award any compensation for the death of his wife and dismissed the complaint against the respondents. 2) The brief facts that led to filing of the present appeal are as under: The appellant and his wife Smt. Dodda Naveena hereinafter referred to as the deceased are husband and wife and the deceased was given an LPG connection under DEEPAM Scheme by the Government vide document No. APSO-2007-2008, No. 3343882 dt. 14.8.2008 with Consumer No. GPC 2231, Subscription Voucher No. 3343882. The said LPG cylinder was supplied by the respondents herein. When the appellant observed some leakage of gas from the said cylinder/regulator/rubber tube/stove the same was brought to the notice of the officials of the respondents and also the Tahasildhar of Aswapura...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »