Court : Andhra Pradesh
..... in the case asserting that the ingredients of the alleged offences are not made out. he has placed reliance upon the decisions in v.p. shrivastava v indian explosives ltd.1, preeti gupta v state of jharkhand2, virender prasad singh v rajesh bhardwaj3, joseph salvaraj v state of gujarat4 in support of his pleas. learned additional ..... and both the cases have to be decided on the basis of the evidence adduced therein. however, there may be cases where the provisions of sections 41 to 43 of the indian evidence act, 1872, dealing with the relevance of previous judgments in subsequent cases may be taken into consideration." thus, for the discussion made above, the ..... as arrayed in the criminal case. the defacto complainant filed complaint dated 04.4.2008 before the learned chief metropolitan magistrate at hyderabad which was referred to under section 156(3) cr.p.c for conducting investigation following which the ccs ps, hyderabad registered the crime. the case of the prosecution is as follows. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
..... the accused in the case asserting that the ingredients of the alleged offences are not made out. he has placed reliance upon the decisions in v.p. shrivastava v indian explosives ltd. (2010) 10 scc 361), preeti gupta v state of jharkhand (2010) 7 scc 667), virender prasad singh v rajesh bhardwaj (2010) 9 scc 171), ..... and both the cases have to be decided on the basis of the evidence adduced therein. however, there may be cases where the provisions of sections 41 to 43 of the indian evidence act, 1872, dealing with the relevance of previous judgments in subsequent cases may be taken into consideration. thus, for the discussion made above, the ..... as arrayed in the criminal case. the defacto complainant filed complaint dated 04.4.2008 before the learned chief metropolitan magistrate at hyderabad which was referred to under section 156(3) cr.p.c for conducting investigation following which the ccs ps, hyderabad registered the crime. the case of the prosecution is as follows. the defacto .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
..... to the patient. where an infection following surgery in a "well-staffed and modern hospital remained undiagnosed until the patient sustained crippling injury and where an explosion occurred during the course of administering anaesthetic to the patient when the technique had frequently been used without any mishap 84. further the supreme court has ..... to the complainant? 21. the complainant was admitted in the hospital of the opposite party no.3 on 7.08.2008 for elective lower segment cesarean section. the discharge summary evidences the admission of the complainant in the hospital on 7.8.2008 and her discharge on 10.08.2008; the treatment administered ..... charge of rashness or negligence on the part of the accused doctor. the investigating officer should, before proceeding against the doctor accused of rash or negligent act or omission, obtain an independent and competent medical opinion preferably from a doctor in government service qualified in that branch of medical practice who can normally .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
..... the case was proceeded against the accused, who were charge sheeted for the charges under sections 147, 148, 324, 326, 307, 302 read with 149 of ipc, section 3, 4 and 6 of the explosive substances act and section 25(b) and 27 of the arms act. the trial was commenced on 23.03.2010, whereat the prosecution examined 41 witnesses, ..... marked 100 documents and 116 material objects. the trial was concluded on 09.05.2012. the case was posted for examination of the accused under section 313 ..... that the material on record disclosed complicity in the commission of offence by a1 and a2 in the first information report, summoned them in exercise of powers under section 319(1) of the code of criminal procedure. therefore, the magistrate can straight away take cognizance of the offence made out against the newly added accused.10. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
..... ; the same day, the sho, p.s. hussaini-alam, hyderabad, (a.p.), registered a case vide cr.no.100/2007 u/s.302, 207, 120(b) ipc, sec.3 and 5 of explosive substance act,1908; subsequently the case was transferred to cbi; the cbi re-registered the case vide r.c.no.5(s)/2007/scr-iii/cbi/nd on 6.10 ..... cr.no.2/2011 wherein they are alleged to have committed offences u/s.302, 307, 326, 120(b) ipc; sections 3, 4, 5 of explosive substances act,1908; and sections 13, 15, 16, 18, 19 and 23 of un-lawful activities (prevention) act, 1967.3. the above crl.m.p.no.569 of 2012 was filed by the respondents seeking regular bail u/s ..... the case as cr.no.2/2011 u/s.302, 307, 326, 511 r/w 120(b) ipc, sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of explosive substance act, 1908 and sections 13, 15 r/w. 16, 18, 19 and 23 of un- lawful activities (prevention) act, 1967; the nia also took up investigation and all relevant documents were collected; during the course of investigation by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
..... would supply ammonium nitrate to iel and against this supply, iel would supply explosives of an equivalent value to bccl, which in turn would supply coal of equivalent value to fcil. in the month of july and september 2002, the government of india ..... for enclosing of all the units of fcil. on 22.05.2003, iel instituted a criminal complaint for the offences under sections 406, 420 and 120-b i.p.c. read with sections 540 and 542 of the companies act, 1956. they also filed a suit o.s.no.34 of 2003 for recovery of the outstanding amount. issue of summons ..... in nature and ingredients constituting an offence of cheating are not made out.13. v.p.shrivastava v. indian explosives limited and others4, was a case in which the complainant who was engaged in the manufacture and sale of industrial explosives placed an order for purchase of ammonium nitrate from fcil. as per the agreement, it was agreed that fcil .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
..... the order of the jmfc, chittapur which held that no case was made out against the accused no.2 and 3 for the offence under the provisions of the indian explosives act. 6. it is contended that the statement of the appellant made in her affidavit cannot be held to be denied without cross examining her and that the district forum considered ..... p.s. submitted htat there is no evidence against the accused pawan s/o venkatesh joshi and raghavendra s/o mukund rao and prays for reasing the accused as per sec.169 of cr.p.c. perused the records and found that there is no case against the accused pawan s/o venkatesh joshi and raghavendra s/o mukund rao as ..... court/forum, the period spent between the filing of the claim before the district forum and the disposal of the matter today by us will be excluded under section 14 of the limitation act, 1963 in the light of the decision of the honble supreme court in trai foods ltd vs national insurance company ltd and others reported in iii (2012) cpj .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
..... liable to indemnify the complainant since the policy coverage being wide and encompasses many aspects such as damage to the vehicle due to accident, fire, lightening self-ignition, explosion, theft, riot and strike, malicious act, terrorism, earthquake, flood, cyclone and inundation rejecting the estimate forwarded by the second opposite party is unjust and unfair. 4. the opposite parties no.1 and 2 ..... r. lakshminarsimha rao, incharge president 1. the complainant filed the complaint under section 17 of the consumer protection act, complaining deficiency in service against the opposite parties seeking direction to the opposite parties to carry out repairs to the damaged vehicle at the cost and consequences of the opposite .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
..... 16 in s.c.no.63 of 2009. in the course of trial for the offences under sections 147, 148, 324, 326, 307, 302 r/w 149 of ipc, sections 3, 4, and 6 of explosive substances act and section 25(1-b)(b) and 27 of arms act. they filed a petition before the ii additional sessions judge, kurnool at adoni who is trying ..... an advocate-commissioner to note down the physical features of venue of offence to prepare an observation report and rough sketch and to submit the same to the court. under section 284 of cr.p.c. a commission can be issued sparingly for the examination of the witnesses. therefore, the petition filed by the petitioners before the learned trial court ..... a local inspection and it would not be proper on the part of this court to issue a direction to the trial judge in exercise of powers of revision under section 401 cr.p.c. to make a local inspection. the revision petition is misconceived and accordingly it is dismissed. miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed in this revision shall .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
..... . it is a well known fact that government and its corporations are the biggest litigants in this court and this type of cases contribute to the docket explosion. a little effort by the respondents and the counsel would go a long way in early disposal of the cases, instead of keeping the cases pending for ..... a notice dated 18-01-2003 said to have been issued by the 1st respondent seeking cooperation of the petitioners 1 and 2 for giving consent under section 146 of the act for the purpose of road widening. 06. the learned senior counsel while relying on judgments of this court in m/s.ushodaya publications vs. the ..... , municipal corporation of hyderabad and other(5) this court considered the issue of demolition of structures without following the procedure under section 406 of the act and held that without issuing notice under section 406 of the act, structures cannot be removed. incidentally, the power of the court to award damages for unreasonable, high-handed, unauthorized and illegal .....
Tag this Judgment!