Andhra Pradesh Court September 2015 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.
G. Kiran Kumar and Another Vs. The State of A.P., Rep. by the District ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2015
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the unilateral action of respondent No.3, in cancelling the allotment of shop rooms made in favour of the petitioners in the shopping complex situated at Gunti, Jangai Nagar, EWS Colony, LB.Nagar, Hyderabad vide proceeding bearing Lr.No.C/3512/87, dated 2.4.2012, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Mr.S.Tulasidas, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.M.Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes Co-operative Finance Corporation Limited, appearing for the respondents. The petitioners, who belong to the Scheduled Caste, were allotted one shop room each in the above-mentioned shopping complex by respondent No.2 vide proceeding No.C/3512/87, dated 03-11-2011, subject to the conditions contained therein. After one month of such allotment, respondent No.3 has issued the proceeding bearing No.C/3512/SC/RR/87, dated 12.12.2011, wherein he has kept the allotment in abeyance until further orders.About fou...
Trinadha Patro Vs. Lingaraj Rana
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2015
1) In this revision filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/defendant challenges the order dated 26.06.2015 in I.A.No.125 of 2015 in O.S.No.43 of 2014 passed by Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sompeta whereby and whereunder the learned Judge dismissed the petition filed under Section 35 of Indian Stamp Act requesting the Court to impound the petition mentioned unregistered mortgage deed dated 31.03.2003. 2) Factual matrix of the case is thus: a) The respondent/plaintiff filed O.S.No.43 of 2014 against the petitioner/defendant seeking perpetual injunction in respect of plaint schedule vacant site situated in Gandhipeta Baruva village, Sompeta Mandal of Srikakulam District pleading that originally plaint schedule property was a thatched house belonging to his paternal-grand-father ”Bollobho Narayana Rono and after him it devolved on his only son ”Tarini Rono and later the said property was devolved on his four sons i.e. plaintiff and his three broth...
M/s. Penna Cement Industries Ltd. Vs. The Principal Chief Conservator ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-2015
Common Order: The parties to both these writ petitions and the subject matter thereof are common. Hence, these writ petitions are heard and being disposed of together. One M/s.Chaanakya Cements Limited had established its cement plant at Ganesh Pahad Village, Damar Cherla Mandal, Nalgonda District. It got itself amalgamated with the petitioner company with effect from 01.04.2003, vide this Court's order, dated 25.03.2004, in Company Petition No.192 of 2003. Through proceedings, dated 23.02.2005, the Government of India (Ministry of Environment and Forests) accorded in-principle (Stage I) approval for diversion of 162.56 hectares of forest land for lime stone quarrying in favour of M/s.Chaanakya Cements Limited with certain conditions stipulated therein and it was further informed that after receipt of compliance report on fulfillment of the conditions, the proposal will be considered for final approval. The relevant conditions contained in proceedings, dated 23.02.2005, of the Governme...
M/s. RSR Infra Works (India) Pvt Ltd and PVSRSN Enterprises Pvt Ltd (J ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-2015
In pursuance of tender notice No.2/2010-11, dated 07.02.2011, issued by respondent No.2, the petitioner has offered its tender for execution of the work of Providing balance hydro mechanical items for spill way regulator, formation of flood banks on both sides of river from spill way to old regulator (new work), formation of balance dyke portion and excavation of balance right main canal from KM 0/0 to KM 48.88 including construction/completion of all CM and CD works (excluding reach from KM 43.00 to KM 47.00) of Thotapalli Barrage Project in Vizianagarm District. Under Clause-2.3 of the Bid document, the bid validity period is three months from the date of opening of the bids. It is not in dispute that the bid validity of 90 days expired by 07.7.2011. The respondents could not finalise the tender process within the bid validity period. However, the petitioner on its own, through letter, dated 12.7.2011, extended the bid validity period up to 31.10.2011. Having waited for three months ...
S. Ayub Basha Vs. The University of Hyderabad and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-2015
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the appointment of respondent No.3 as Executive Engineer of respondent No.1-University in pursuance of the selection held on 25.06.2009 as illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and unconstitutional and to appoint the petitioner to the said post on his merit. The facts of this case in brief are as under: Respondent No.1 has issued employment notification, dated 07.01.2009, inter alia notifying one post of Executive Engineer shown as unreserved. Clause 4.02 of the said notification prescribed a Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering with ten years experience in design and systems and construction of building, roads, sanitary and water supply systems including maintenance of the same as the required qualification. It is also shown that Post-graduate Degree in Structures is a desirable qualification. In pursuance of the said notification, the petitioner who holds the Post-graduation Degree, i.e., M.Tech., (Structural) from Indian Institute of T...
Shaik Umar @ Babu and Others Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-2015
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. These three Appeals are preferred by Accused 1 to 3 in S.C.No. 66 of 2009 on the file of the V Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nizamabad, where they were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No.3 was also found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code additionally. All the accused were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for LIFE. Criminal Appeal No. 777 of 2010 was preferred by Accused 1 and 2. Criminal Appeal No. 983 of 2011 was a State Legal Aid brief, whereas Accused No.3 has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1644 of 2010 on her own. Hence, all the three Appeals are heard together today. Heard Sri Qazi Syed Mazheruddin, Sri K. Rama Subba Rao and Smt. R.V. Indira Kumari, learned counsel on behalf of the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. The case of the prosecution is that one Smt. Lalitha Kumari (here...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›