Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-22-2006
Reported in : 2006(3)ALD614
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. In a suit for partition filed by the brothers of the revision-petitioner, who is the first defendant, filed a petition to implead one Nataniel as a party to the suit on the ground that his brothers alienated some property to Nataniel and so he is a necessary party to the suit and that petition was allowed and that order was confirmed by this Court in a revision. Thereafter, revision-petitioner filed a petition seeking amendment of the plaint for inclusion of the properties alienated to Nataniel, which was dismissed on the ground that the defendant in a suit cannot seek amendment of the plaint. Hence, this revision.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for revision-petitioner is that since the transferee of the property belonging to the family was ordered to be impleaded as a party to the suit, if the properties alienated to him are also included in the plaint schedule, it would be convenient for the parties to work out the equities at the time of final dec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-22-2006
Reported in : 2006(5)ALD834
..... ex parte decree, dated 4-2-1998. since there was delay of 269 days in filling the said application, the petitioners filed ia. no. 134 of 1999 under section 5 of the limitation act. the petitioners pleaded that soon after they received summons in the suit, they engaged an advocate and in the meanwhile, the well-wishers of both the parties have ..... not trying any criminal case, to see whether the witnesses were independent. by the very nature of the things, it is only the acquainted and closely related persons that would act as mediators and not those, who are unconnected, or inimically disposed.9. it is not as if the suit was pending for years together, on account of non-cooperation of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-24-2006
Reported in : AIR2006AP245; 2006(4)ALD146
..... arrived at by the learned judge. the learned counsel for the cross-objector had contended that this cannot be taken as an admission within the meaning of section 18 of the indian evidence act for the reason that it is only a reply notice unsigned by the party in question and even otherwise, there is no effective cross-examination in ..... main relief, it is needless to say that no separate court fee need be paid on such an alternative relief. in the light of clear language of section 22 of the specific relief act, 1963 this court is of the considered view that at the appellate stage, the application praying for amendment has to be allowed and accordingly, a.s. ..... is not inclined to grant the relief of specific performance. the said application is seriously opposed by filling counter-affidavit in detail. as can be seen from section 22 of the specific relief act, 1963, in a case of this nature, whatever the stage may be, when an alternative relief is prayed for, the court may have to allow such .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-24-2006
Reported in : 2006(3)ALD342
..... we have held (scc p.57, para 6) the rule of estoppel between landlord and tenant enacted in section 116 of the evidence act has three main features : (i) the tenant is estopped from disputing the title of his landlord over the tenancy premises at the beginning of the tenancy; (ii) such ..... been inducted by the landlord so long as he remains in possession cannot deny the title of his landlord in view of the rule of estoppel contained in section 116 of the evidence act. recently in vashu deo v. balakishan, we had occasion to sum up the law as to estoppel of a tenant and as to eviction by title paramount and ..... has materially reduced the utility and value of the suit premises. the respondent in order to harass and cause loss to them, filed a vexatious petition under section 8(5) of the rent control act in r.c. no. 1098 of 1987 on the file of the principal rent controller, hyderabad, for deposit of rent and the same is pending. the respondent .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-27-2006
Reported in : 2006(3)ALD365; 2006(4)ALT236
..... go into further factual details, which may have to be decided at length at appropriate stage. suffice to state that the revision petitioner filed an application under section 65 of the act read with section 151 of the code of civil procedure, 1908, (hereinafter referred to as 'the code'), to permit the petitioner to file the certified copy of the ..... and if the secondary evidence happens to be certified copies of registered document, then the contents thereof can be read in evidence by virtue of sub-section 5 of section 57 of registration act.in this case, admittedly, the petitioner herein was given notice to produce the document no. 2 but he has stated that it was not in ..... if the secondary evidence happens to be certified copy of the registered document, then the contents thereof can be read in evidence by virtue of sub-section (5) of section 57 of the registration act. hence, i am of the opinion that the trial court is right in allowing the documents to be marked. 11. it is no doubt true .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-28-2006
Reported in : 2006(3)ALD457; 2006(3)ALT510
..... assets to the creditors or other persons, whom the firm owes liability. that was never the object, either in enacting section 17 of the registration act, section 48 of the partnership act or section 17 of the arbitration act.22. more than a decade had already elapsed. the remedy, which was chosen to be a speedier and effective one, ..... court held in categorical terms that all the assets of the firm assume the characteristic of movable property, the question of insistence on compliance with section 17 of the registration act, for distribution of such assets does not arise. it is not as if the assets would be movable property, if allotted to partners, and ..... supreme court. the allotment of items of immovable property, through an award, in favour of various parties to arbitration, was examined, with reference to section 17 of the registration act. a full bench of the patna high court in seonarain lal v. prabhu chand : air1958pat252 held that an award of an arbitrator becomes enforceable only .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-28-2006
Reported in : [2007]136CompCas758(AP); [2007]80SCL69(AP)
..... any question of priorities or any other question whatsoever that might arise in the course of winding up of the company. although clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 446 of the act speaks of filing any suit or proceeding by or against the company, which is in the nature of a cheap and summary remedy, if the official ..... mismanagement. civil suits used to be filed in regular municipal courts pertaining to the company matters. it is only for the first time under sub-section (2) of section 446 of the companies act, jurisdiction has been conferred upon the company court to take cognizance of such matters filed before it and it excludes the jurisdiction of the civil courts ..... company court to dispose of any suit or proceeding by or against the company; any claim made by or against the company; any application made under section 391 of the companies act by or in respect of the company ; and any question of priorities or any other question whatsoever whether of law or fact which may relate to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-28-2006
Reported in : 2006(4)ALD23
..... or order which may be made therein except under the authority of the court and on such terms as it may impose.explanation :-for the purposes of this section, the pendency of a suit or proceeding shall be deemed to commence from the date of the presentation of the plaint or the institution of the proceeding ..... effected with the permission of the court, and the same is being protected by virtue of section 52 of the transfer of property act, 1882, equity may have to be worked out in relation to the said item.section 52 of the act aforesaid reads :section 52 : transfer of property pending suit relating thereto :-during the pendency in any court ..... the learned counsel would maintain that in the light of the clear language in section 52 of the transfer of property act 1882, inasmuch as the property was purchased under the authority of the court, the same was protected under section 52 of the aforesaid act and hence during the final decree proceeding the allotment of this property purchased with .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-28-2006
Reported in : 2006(3)ALD753
..... the property. in giri yadav v. l. ramesh goud : 2005(4)ald562 , it was held by this court that such cases are covered by proviso to section 49 of the registration act. therefore, ex.a-8 was very much admissible in evidence, at least for the collateral purpose.16. now remains the third point. in deciding a us ..... circumstances, under which the lease was granted in favour of the defendants, and the manner in which it was terminated, by issuing a notice under section 106 of the transfer of property act. nothing was elicited from this witness by the second defendant, to suggest that the lease did not exist, or that it was not terminated, in ..... the defendants committed default in payment of rent, property tax, electricity bills, etc. ultimately, she got issued a notice, dated 13-6-1997, under section 106 of the transfer of property act, terminating the lease, with effect from 31-7-1997. she claimed the reliefs of eviction of defendants and realization of arrears under various heads, with interest .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-01-2006
Reported in : AIR2006AP233; 2006(3)ALD673
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The respondent filed O.S. No. 170 of 1996, in the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, against the petitioner, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 3,22,483/-, on the strength of a promissory note. The trial of the suit commenced, and the cross-examination of the petitioner herein was also completed. At that stage, the petitioner filed I.A. No. 1171 of 2004, with a prayer to send the promissory note to an expert, for opinion. The trial Court dismissed the application, through its order dated 6-12-2004. Hence, this C.R.P.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court dismissed the I.A., only on the ground that it was filed at a belated stage. Placing reliance upon the judgment of this Court in Medikonda Rama Swarajyalakshmi v. Posina Sathyanarayana 1999 (1) ALD 210, he submits that the delay by itself, cannot constitute the basis for dismissal of such an application. He also contends that the comparison of the signature on the pro...
Tag this Judgment!