Andhra Pradesh Court February 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.
M/S.Ram Informatics Limited Havingits Vs. Cms Computers Ltd., Having I ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR Writ Appeal No.151 of 2014 07-2-2014 M/s. RAM Informatics Limited Having its office at 8-2-1/B/1, Srinagar Colony Road Punjagutta, Hyderabad Rep. by its Director P.S. Raman... Appellant CMS Computers Ltd., Having its office at CMS Lake Road Centre No.70, Lake Road, Kaycee Industrial Compound Bhandup West (Mumbai 400 078) Rep. by its Managing Director and another... Respondents !COUNSEL FOR APPEALLANT: Sri B. Chandrasen Reddy COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1 : Sri K. Gopal COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2 : Government Pleader for General Administration Dept. HEAD NOTE: ?.CITATIONS: (2005) 4 SCC649THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.151 OF2014JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This writ appeal is filed against the judgment and order of the learned trial Judge, dt.12.12.2013 by which th...
Smt. Naseeb Khatoo Vs. Syed Abdul Azizand Other
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR CITY CIVIL COURT APPEAL No.166 OF200407-02-2014 Smt. Naseeb Khatoon.... APPELLANT Syed Abdul Aziz and others.... RESPONDENTS Counsel for Appellant: MR. V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for Respondents : MR. J.KANAKAIAH GIST : HEAD NOTE: ?.Cases referred:1. AIR1963SC8842. (2005) 8 SCC3303. (2009) 16 SCC5174. 2010 (6) ALD2075. (2011) 12 SCC2206. AIR1954SC526THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CITY CIVIL COURT APPEAL No.166 of 2004 The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: This appeal is by the unsuccessful plaintiff, whose suit, O.S.No.1540 of 1996 for declaration and possession was dismissed by the trial Court under judgment and decree dated 17.02.2004.2. Mr. V. Venkataramana, learned senior counsel for the appellant, has pointed out that the impugned judgment of the trial Court has proceeded to dismiss the suit merely on the plea of the respondents/defendants that they are in adverse possession, though there is no issue framed nor the defendant...
Ms. Sri Matha Manikeshawrienterprises,r Vs. the General Manager, South ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Sr.KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.101 of 2013 07-02-2014 Ms.Sr.Matha Manikeshawri Enterprises,represented by its Proprietor R.Srinath Reddy..Applicant The General Manager, South Central Railways, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad and others..Respondents !COUNSEL FOR APPLICANT: Ms.Keerthi Prabhakar COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NOs.1 to 3: M/s.C.V.Vinitha Reddy HEAD NOTE: ?.CITATIONS: 1.(1988) 2 Supreme Court Cases 338 2.(2013) 7 Supreme Court Cases 562 3.(2005) 8 SCC6184.(2011) 3 SCC507HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Sr.KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.101 of 2013 ORDER: This is an application for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate the disputes arising between the parties. In this matter, there is no dispute as to the existence, validity and legality of the arbitration agreement. Only dispute, as raised by the respondents, is that the claim has become a dead one. Learne...
Boddala Guramma and Another Vs. 1.Boddala Ramamurthy (Died)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM SECOND APPEAL No.1003 of 2011 07-02-2014 Boddala Guramma and another..... Appellants 1.Boddala Ramamurthy (died) 2.Boddala Bangaramma and another.....Respondents Counsel for the appellants: Sri M.S.R. Subrahmanyam Counsel for respondent No.1: Died Counsel for the respondents 2 & 3: Sri G. Venkateswara Rao : ?.Cases referred: Nil HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM SECOND APPEAL No.1003 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appellants are the plaintiffs and the respondents are the defendants in the suit.2. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated 25.04.2011, in A.S.No.120 of 2006, passed by the Court of Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (PoA) Act-cum- Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram, confirming the judgment and decree dated 18.10.2006 passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram in O.S.No.16 of 2001, dismissing the suit for partition of plaint 'A' and 'B' schedule properties into 2 equal shares and for allotment of o...
M/S. Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd., Beside Kalanikethan, Labbipet Branch, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
Oral Order: (S. Bhujanga Rao, Member) This appeal is directed against the order dt.15.04.2013 of the District Forum-II, Krishna Dist. at Vijayawada in C.C.No.198/2012, filed by the respondent/complainant, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, against the appellant/opposite party. 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: The complainant joined as a subscriber in the chit commenced by the opposite party Chit Fund Company for a sum of Rs.1 lakh, payable in 50 monthly instalments @ Rs.2000/- per month. The said chit was commenced in the month of July,2008. The complainant paid 44 monthly instalments regularly till February,2012, totalling to Rs.88,000/-. From February,2012, the opposite party did not collect the subscriptions from the complainant. Therefore, the complainant approached the opposite party, when he was informed that the opposite party wou...
Potturi Tulasidas and Others Vs. Southern Power Distribution Company o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
T. Ashok Kumar, Member The appeal F.A.No.632/2012 is preferred by the complainant and F.A.No.521/2013 is preferred by third parties seeking leave to prefer appeal against the order in C.C.No.98/2012 dated 04-7-2012 on the file of District Forum, Guntur. For convenience sake the parties as arrayed in the complaint are referred to hereunder: The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is residing in house bearing door No.26-5 with electricity service connection bearing No.10868 since 1985. He is regular in payment of electricity consumption charges. He filed OS No.50/1985 on the file of Subordinate Judges Court, Narasaraopet against his brother and father in respect of the subject house and thereafter was unsuccessful in respect of the said suit in the Honble High Court of AP and Honble Supreme Court of India. On 22-9-2011, third opposite party served a notice on the complainant threatening to disconnect power supply in respect of the said service connection and the complai...
Ms. Simran Sultana Vs. E. Meditek (Tpa) Service Ltd. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
Gopala Krishna Tamada, President 1) Complainant is the appellant and she approached this Commission questioning the order passed by the Dist. Forum, Medak at Sangareddy in CC No. 37/2012 dt. 17.6.2013 whereby her claim for an amount of Rs. 2,40,000/- towards medical expenditure for treatment was denied. 2) The brief facts that led to filing of this appeal are that the appellant/complainant obtained SBI Life Insurance Daily Hospital Cash Policy from the Opposite Parties 1 and 2 by remitting premium amount on 10.2.2012 and the period which was covered under the said premium is 10.2.2012 to 9.2.2013. As she fell ill, she was hospitalized and had undergone treatment from Siri Maternity and Nursing Home at Narasapur for a period of 45 days i.e., from 6.4.2012 to 23.5.2012. Immediately, after discharge she brought the said fact to the notice of respondents/opposite parties. As there was no response, a legal notice was issued claiming total sum of Rs. 2,40,000/- towards medical expenses, howe...
Kande an Vs. Kanda Sha
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL C.M.A.Nos.155 of 2002 and batch 07-02-2014 Kande Andalu..appellant Kanda Shankar..Respondent Counsel for the appellant: Smt.S.Vani Counsel for the Respondent: Sr.T. Suryakaran Reddy HEAD NOTE: ?.Cases referred THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL C.M.A.Nos.155 & 168 of 2002 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Honble Sr.Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) Both the appeals are between the same parties. The appellant is the wife of the respondent. Their marriage took place way back on 20-12-1980 and they were also blessed with two daughters and one son, who are now not only married, but also settled in their respective lives. The respondent i.e.the husband of the appellant, filed O.P.No.337 of 2000 in the Family Court, Hyderabad, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (for short the Act) for divorce, against the appellant. The appellant, on the other hand, filed O.P.No.338 of...
Sudhakara Reddy Vs. Lakshmamm
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2014
THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY SECOND APPEAL No.258 OF200507-02-2014 Sudhakara Reddy..... APPELLANT Lakshmamma.....RESPONDENT Counsel for the appellant: Sri S.V.Sundara Rajan Counsel for the respondent: Ms. B.Tarasuja : ?.Cases referred:1. AIR2008SC20332.2006 (6) ALT523(FB) 3.AIR1965SC364THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY SECOND APPEAL No.258 OF2005Dated:07. 02.2014 JUDGMENT: This Second Appeal is filed challenging the decree and judgment, dated 20.11.2004 in A.S.No.10 of 2002 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Hindupur reversing in appeal the decree and judgment dated 27.02.2002 in O.S.No.241 of 1992 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Hindupur. For the sake of convenience the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed in the trial Court.2. The case of the plaintiff is that late Chinna Gowramma, wife of Venkata Reddy, during her lifetime, has been in possession and enjoyment of the land admeasuring Ac.6.29 Pyki in survey No.346/1; Ac.3.43 Pyki in ...
The Commissioner of Income Taxhyderaba Vs. M/S. Usha Kiran Movies Limi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2014
HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Sr.KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR I.T.T.A.Nos.31 of 2007 and BATCH062-2014 The Commissioner of Income Tax Hyderabad I.Appellant M/S.Usha Kiran Movies Limited Eenadu Compound Somajiguda Hyderabad.Respondent..Respondent !COUNSEL FOR APPEALLANT : Sr.J.V.Prasad, Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT : Ms.Mamata Chowdary HEAD NOTE: ?. CITATIONS: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Sr.KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR I.T.T.A.NOs.31 OF2007AND60OF2010COMMON JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Sr.Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) I.T.T.A.NO.60 OF2010This appeal was admitted for hearing without formulating substantial question of law as required to be done under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view, we would have formulated such questions had we decided the matter in favour of the appellant. However, on perusal of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »