Andhra Pradesh Court February 2016 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.
K. Sumathi Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-18-2016
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies and with their consent the main writ petition itself is taken up for final hearing and disposed of at the interlocutory stage. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the 4th respondent in canceling the authorization of the petitioner's fair price shop dealership through proceedings dated 13.04.2015. The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as fair price shop dealer of Tekumanda Village Bangarupalem Mandal, Chittoor District through proceedings dated 18.07.2008 on permanent basis. The 4th respondent issued proceedings dated 26.11.2014 suspending the authorization of the petitioner pending enquiry on some allegations. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.36892 of 2014 and this Court disposed of the said W.P. through order dated 3.12.2014 granting liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy of appeal before the Joint Collector. Accordingly the petit...
M/s. Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies Rep. by its proprietor, N. Ajay Babu Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2016
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. This writ petition is instituted seeking a writ of Mandamus for declaring the action of the respondent “ bank in issuing E-Auction sale notice on 25.01.2016, without issuing any notice as contemplated in sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, as bad in law. The writ petitioner seems to have availed financial assistance from the 2nd respondent “ bank on 27.05.2013. On 19.09.2014 the 2nd respondent “ bank got served notice under sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 calling upon the petitioner to liquidate the entire outstanding amount due in Rs.88,87,157/- within 60 days time, as the loan account has been classified as non performing asset on 30.08.2014. It is the specific case of the petitioner that a residential property given as a security for t...
Dwara Satyanarayana Vs. Malladi Bhanumathi and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2016
1. This civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner/plaintiff is directed against the orders dated 10.11.2011 of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kovvur wherein and whereby the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge refused to admit in evidence the document dated 15.05.1996 tendered in evidence during the further examination in chief of PW1 (the plaintiff) on the ground that the said document, which is unregistered, cannot be admitted in evidence for want of registration. 2. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/plaintiff ( ˜the plaintiff', for short) and the learned counsel for the respondents/defendants ( ˜the defendants', for short). I have perused the material record including the copy of the document in question. 3. The facts, which fall for consideration, in brief, are as follows: The plaintiff brought the suit against the defendants for declaration of right in ABCDEFschedule...
Hanumantu Narayana Dora Vs. The Srikakuklam Co-op. Urban Bank Ltd. and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-2016
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. This Writ Appeal is directed against the common order passed by our learned Brother Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy in Writ Petitions No. 7555 of 2011 and 3028 of 2012 on 25.06.2015. In this Appeal, the petitioner-appellant has chosen to call in question the correctness of the view taken insofar as Writ Petition No. 3028 of 2012 alone is concerned, leaving the order passed in Writ Petition No. 7555 of 2011 untouched. Hence, we confine our scrutiny to this extent. The writ petitioner is the appellant herein. It is his specific case that he was subjected to an inquiry ordered to be conducted in terms of and in accordance with Section 51 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short, the Act') once before by the proceedings of the Joint Registrar, Srikakulam, dated 16.03.2005, which culminated in a report being submitted in that regard on 04.01.2009 by the Inquiry Officer-cum-General Manager, District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Khammam. Now...
Mohammed Abdul Azeem and Another Vs. M/s. South India Prime Tannery Pv ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-2016
1. Aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 01.10.2007 in O.S.No.104 of 2003 passed by the learned XII Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, at Hyderabad, granting specific performance decree in favour plaintiff in respect of suit schedule property i.e, undivided half share in premises bearing Municipal No.1-5-6/A (new), 1-5-6(old) admeasuring 516 sq.yards out of 1032 sq.yards situated at Bakaram, Musheerabad, Hyderabad, the defendants preferred the instant appeal. 2. The first defendant is the father and 2nd defendant is the son of 1st defendant. The Plaintiff's case in brief is that the defendants 1 and 2 along with other sharers ”Sri Mohd. Abdul Mannan and his son ”Sri Mohd. Meraj had entered into an agreement of sale of the premises bearing Municipal No.1-5-6/A(new), 1-5-6(old) admeasuring 1032 sq.yards situated at Bakaram, Musheerabad, Hyderabad, with the plaintiff on 25.02.2000 for Rs.49,53,600/- at the rate of Rs.4800/- per sq.yard and on the same day, th...
N. Venkatesh Naik Vs. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, rep. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-2016
1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the order passed by the office of the Regional Manager, Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, Nalgonda vide Proceedings No. No. P3/684(1)/2013-RM.N, dated 01.02.2014. 2. Heard Sri V.Narasimha Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.Ravi Babu, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, apart from perusing the material available before the Court. 3. Petitioner's father one Sri N.Pandu was removed from service on 12.11.2003 by the Depot Manager, Devarakonda and assailing the said order of removal, he filed an appeal and pending the appeal, petitioner's father died on 25.4.2004 and subsequently, the legal representatives of deceased N.Pandu i.e. petitioner herein and his family members raised I.D.No.122 of 2005, questioning the order of removal passed against petitioner's father. The Labour Court-III, Hyderabad by way of award dated 5.2.2007 in I.D.No.122...
C. Malla Reddy Vs. The Authorized Officer, IDBI Bank Limited and Other ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-2016
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks a writ of mandamus for declaring the action of Respondents 1 and 2 in taking possession of the residential house bearing D.No. 1-5-230 situated in Survey No. 51/AA, Alwal Village, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and hence, to direct Respondents 1 and 2 together with the 3rd respondent Advocate-Commissioner appointed in Crl.M.P.No. 654 of 2015 on the file of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar to forthwith restore the possession of the house property described supra to the petitioner and also to quash the proceedings initiated by Respondents 1 and 2 under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 against the agricultural properties in Survey No. 51/EE, Alwal Village, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and also to order for stay of all further pro...
M/s. Lakshmi Priya Exports (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. M/s. Ramal ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2016
Common Order: 1. These Civil Revision Petitions are being disposed of by this common order as they arise out of two suits, where the defendants were common. O.S.No.23 of 2007 was filed by M/s.Ramalingam Mills Ltd., seeking recovery of money against the defendants and O.S.No.31 of 2007 was filed by one Velu Yarn Traders seeking recovery of money against the same defendants in O.S.No.23 of 2007. When the suits were coming up for arguments, the plaintiffs filed two sets of four interlocutory applications in both the suits for reopening the suits, for receiving certain documents, and for recalling P.W.1 and D.W.1. All the applications were allowed by the learned III Additional District Judge, Tirupati, by two common orders dated 22.09.2014, challenging which, the defendants filed the above Civil Revision Petitions, and the details are as under: Sl.No.C.R.P.No.Filed againstI.A.No.I.A filed under the provisions of CPCO.S.No.13624 of 2014999 of 2014Section 15123 of 200724068 of 20141000 of 20...
S. Ramanjaneylu Vs. The State of A.P., rep. by its Secretary, Consumer ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-2016
The petitioner has been appointed as Fair Price Shop Dealer for Shop No. 2 of Kothacheruvu Village and Mandal, Ananthapur District. While so, based on the report submitted by the third respondent-Tahsildar, the second respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer issued a show cause notice on 3.8.2015 levelling three charges against the petitioner, to which, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 14.8.2015. Dissatisfied with the same, the second respondent by order dated 25.8.2015 suspended the authorization of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 28275 of 2015 and this Court through order dated 10.09.2015 disposed of the said Writ Petition directing the second respondent to complete the enquiry within sixty days from the date of receipt of the said order by duly observing the principles of natural justice. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the order of this Court, the second respondent did not choose to complete the enquiry. Hence...
Kunj Bihari and Others Vs. Om Prakash and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-12-2016
This civil revision petition is craving for disposal for the last 13 years on a simple issue as to whether the additional issues proposed by the petitioners as defendants in the suit must be framed or not. The undisputed facts leading to filing of the civil revision petition are that respondent No.1 has filed O.S.No.1721 of 1996 in the Court of the learned Additional Judge, City Small Causes Court-cum-VI Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad for specific performance of agreement of sale against the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 to 14. It is the case of respondent No.1 that respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the original owners of the suit schedule property of which he is a tenant under oral tenancy. It is his further case that in pursuance of the oral agreement of sale, respondent Nos.2 and 3 agreed to sell the suit schedule property to him. That the petitioners and respondent Nos.4 to 10 have purchased separate portions of the suit schedule property from respondent Nos.2 and 3....