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.
A. Laxman and Others Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-2016
Common Judgment: (Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J.) These appeals are preferred by the claimants in O.P.Nos.89 and 87 of 1999 respectively under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act), calling in question the correctness of the market value arrived at by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Adilabad for their lands, which stood acquired for a public purpose. The State Government has acquired lands of an extent of Ac.10-02 cents out of total extent of Ac.12-04 cents, which belong to the private individuals while the balance land is that of the Government itself, for the formation of a water tank. The State Government approved the acquisition through their G.O.Rt. No.1819 dated 19th August 1997 and hence, the notification under Sub-Section (1) of Section 4 of the Act was published on 20th August 1997. The Land Acquisition Officer, before finalizing his award, has undertaken inspection of the lands and noticed that the claimants are raising red gram and cotton crops in the la...
The Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. rep. by its Vi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-2016
Common Judgment: (Ramesh Ranganathan, J.) CCCA No.104 of 2002 has been filed by the A.P. Mineral Development Corporation Limited against the judgment and decree passed by the II Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in O.S. No.496 of 1994 dated 22.02.2002. The appellant herein is the defendant in O.S.No.496 of 1994 filed by M/s. Pottem Brothers, Hyderabad seeking payment of Rs.39,49,657.23, future interest at 18% per annum from the date of the suit till realisation, and the costs of the suit. C.C.C.A.No.138 of 2003 is filed by the Plaintiff in O.S.No.496 of 1994 aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed therein to the extent the Court below deducted an additional sum of Rs.30/- per metric tonne as expenditure incurred by the plaintiff for excavating the ore from the mine. Parties in these two appeals shall, hereinafter, be referred to as they are arrayed in O.S.No.496 of 1994. In the plaint filed in O.S. No.496 of 1994, the plaintiff stated that an agreement was executed on...
Vijender Kumar Kedia and Others Vs. Salesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-03-2016
Common Judgment: 1. The respective sole defendants are the appellants herein and the respective self-same sole plaintiffs in both the matters are the respondents. Both the suits in O.S. No.1960 of 1988 and 1959 of 1988 are filed by the self-same plaintiff Saleh against the respective defendants Dhanraj and Vijenderkumar Kedia. The trial Court on separate trial decreed both the suits for the relief of specific performance of the contract for sale respectively, to execute and register sale deeds on receiving balance sale consideration and to deliver possession and with costs. 2. The contentions in the grounds of appeal common almost in both the appeals of the respective suits are that the decree and judgment respectively of the trial Court supra are contrary to law, unlawful and against probabilities of the case, perverse and misconceived against the canons of justice. 3. It is specifically contended by the defendant-appellant respectively supra that the trial Court ought to have seen th...
Keshava Reddy Vs. Bal Reddy and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-2016
1. This revision is preferred questioning order dated 18.01.2012 in I.A.No.1010 of 2011 in O.S.No.161 of 2005 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubnagar. 2. Revision petitioner herein is D1 in O.S.No.161 of 2005 filed by respondents No.9 and 10 for partition of plaint schedule properties. In the said suit, defendants No.4 to 10 filed I.A.No.1010 of 2011 contending that suit schedule lands are not the Hindu undivided joint family properties and that there was a partition in between father of D5 and D1 on 28.05.1979 which was signed in the presence of elders, but plaintiffs in collusion with D1 has filed the suit for partition with false claim and that the original document dated 28.05.1979 is in custody of D1 and Xerox copies were given to father of D5 and the said document is crucial for proper adjudication and therefore a direction be given to D1 to produce the said document dated 28.05.1979. 3. D1 filed his counter disputing the affidavit averments of petitioner and he...
Dr. Gangaraju Sowmini and Another Vs. Alavala Sudhakar Reddy and Anoth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-2016
Common Judgment: R. Subhash Reddy, J. 1. This Bench is constituted to answer the reference made in the above M.A.C.M.As. M.A.C.M.A.No.364 of 2010 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Chairman, Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Guntur, whereas, M.A.C.M.A.No.1020 of 2010 is filed by the National Insurance Company Limited, questioning the very award of compensation itself. For the purpose of this reference, we take the facts as narrated in M.A.C.M.A.No.364 of 2010. 2. The deceased Gangaraju Venkata Sudheer, who is the brother of the claimant, was aged about 22 years and was prosecuting his final year Medicine at BLD Medical College, Beejapur of Karnataka State. The appellant/claimant is working as Assistant Professor in Gynaecology at Government hospital, Guntur. On 29.11.2000, while the claimant, her husband, daughter, mother, maternal aunt and deceased were proceeding in Maruti car bearing No.AP-07-3173 from Tirupati to G...
Nelakudithi Venkatapathi Rao and Another Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-2016
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent Nos.2 to 6 in stopping erection of statue occupying road margin adjacent to the wall of the Primary Aided Co-operative Society, Dondapadu Village, Thullur Mandal, Guntur District without approval from the Statue Committee, in violation of the interim orders of the Supreme Court and also G.O.Ms.No.18, dated 18.02.2013, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners pleaded that they are the residents of Dondapadu Village, Guntur District and that both of them are farmers. That Dondapadu Village is predominantly agriculture based one and that roads get blocked when tractors and bullock carts pass through them, that there was a proposal to widen the roads to accommodate the growing traffic and the buses plying to the Village, that lorries are frequenting the Village and when the capital region works progress, there will be increased traffic and that any reduction of road width or occupation of road margin and carr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›