Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on : Jul-08-2009
Oral order ;(per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties against whom the District Forum passed an order directing the opposite parties to pay to the complainant the sum assured with interest and other consequential benefits. The facts that led to filing this appeal are briefly as follows: The father of the complainants aged 25 and16 years, both of whom are shown to be minors paving the way for the husband of the first complainant to foist himself as the guardian, took out an insurance policy on his life with the Life Insurance Corporation of India of which opposite parties are functionaries at two levels. The policy was taken by the father, Venkata Rami Reddy, way back in 1995. Soon Venkata Rami Reddy, father of the complainants, left home and remained at large ever since. A report was given to the Police and a case was registered as man missing. The police claimed to have made efforts to trace the said person but without success. Whi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-30-2009
Reported in : 2009(6)ALT295
..... limited v. export credit guarantee corporation of india limited : (2004)3scc553 , rejected the contention of the respondent-board that the proper forum for alleged breach of a non-statutory contract, more so, when it involved disputed questions of fact, was the civil court of competent jurisdiction and that the writ petition was not maintainable. the learned single judge held that a suit notice, issued under section 68 of the andhra pradesh housing board act, 1956 (for short - 'the act') would not deprive the petitioner of the ..... e. kalathil : air2000sc2573 , national highways authority of india v. ganga enterprises : air2003sc3823 , pimri chinchwad municipal corporation v. gayatri construction co. : (2008)8scc172 , abl international : (2004)3scc553 , haryana financial corporation v. jagdamba oil mills : [2002]1scr621 , s.l. kapoor v. jagmohan : [1981]1scr746 , life insurance corporation of india v. asha goel (2001) 2 scc 160, union of india v. s.p. anand : [ ..... 3. the developer company providing the bank guarantee as mentioned in section 2.9.1.42. section 8 relates to approvals and, under section 8.1 thereof, the developer company shall obtain all approvals from governmental authorities and other persons for purposes of the project including approvals for (i) constructing and developing the project and (ii) operating and maintaining the project in accordance with the terms of the agreement, the basic documents and the applicable law.43. clause 4 of the agreement dated 08.02.2006 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-02-2009
Reported in : 2009(4)ALT804
1. The unsuccessful plaintiff filed instant appeal against Judgment and decree, dated 31.10.1990 in O.S. No. 155 of 1984 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Nellore. His suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 82,000/- which includes Rs. 58,600/- towards damages and Rs. 23,400/- towards salvage charges, was dismissed by trial Court accepting the plea of respondent insurance company, namely, Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Limited (now Oriental Insurance Company Limited). In this appeal, parties are referred to as they are arrayed in suit.2. The case of plaintiff is as follows. Bobbala Dharma Raju is original owner of MPM 370 fishing boat. So as to insure the boat with defendant company, Dharma Raju paid first instalment of premium in a sum of Rs. 1,650/- on 17.12.1982. Even before regular Marine Hull Policy could be issued, he entered into an agreement with plaintiff to sell the boat for Rs. 66,000/-. Having received entire sale consideration, he transferred boat t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on : Aug-31-2009
Oral Order (Per Smt M. Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.D.No.40/2004 on the file of District Forum, Srikakulam the complainant preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant is a Development Officer in United India Insurance Company Ltd., Srikakulam . The complainant applied for a cell phone connection of the opposite party attracted by the package offer namely Dheerubai Ambani Pioneer Offer introduced by the opposite parties and paid an amount of Rs.5000/- by way demand draft and also submitted 12 post dated cheques of Rs.1,800/- each in favour of the opposite parties for which the opposite parties issued a receipt-cum -acknowledgement dt.3.3.2003 and assured the complainant that the cell phone connection with handset will be given within one month time through fourth opp.party. Inspite of several requests the opposite parties failed to deliver the cell phone handset. Hence the complainant through letter dt.1.12.2003 re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-18-2009
Reported in : 2009(4)ALT127; (2009)IVLLJ167AP
P.S. Narayana, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed under Section 82 of the Employees State Insurance Act (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience) by respondent No. 1, the Deputy Director, ESI Corporation in E.I. Case No. 41 of 2001 on the file of the Employees Insurance Court and Chairman, Industrial Tribunal-I, Hyderabad.2. Respondent No. 1 herein, Amrutanjan Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, filed the said E.I. Case No. 41 of 2001 on the file of the Employees Insurance Court and Chairman, Industrial Tribunal-I, Hyderabad (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Tribunal' for the purpose of convenience) praying for refund of an amount of Rs. 33,178/- paid by the said Amrutanjan Limited under protest and also Rs. 11,301/- paid by the said company erroneously towards conveyance and washing allowances. The Tribunal, after referring to the respective stands taken by the parties, having settled the issues, record...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-18-2009
Reported in : 2009(6)ALT340
ORDERGopala Krishna Tamada, J.1. The Employees State Insurance Corporation represented by its Regional Director is the petitioner herein and it is assailing the order dated 30.05.1998 passed in W.C. No. 98 of 1996, whereby the first respondent herein while awarding compensation of an amount of Rs. 73,668/- to respondents 3 to 5 herein fixed up the said liability on the petitioner as well as the second respondent i.e. the employer, as arbitrary and illegal.2. The brief facts are that one Kondareddi (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') was working as machine operator in M/s. Zenith Granites (Pvt.) Limited, the 2nd respondent herein, and comes within the meaning of workman under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). On 09.10.1994 after attending to his regular duties at 8.00 pm while he was going to the house situated within the campus of the second respondent, met with a live electrical wire and died on account of electrocut...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-20-2009
Reported in : 2009(3)ALT623; (2010)ILLJ407AP
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Kakinada Municipality, represented by its Commissioner, filed the present civil miscellaneous appeal under Section 82(2) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience) challenging the order made in E.I.C. No. 10 of 2002, dated 02.12.2005, made by the Employees' Insurance Court and Chairman, Industrial Tribunal-I, Hyderabad.2. On 10.3.2006 this Court made the following order:Admit for the substantial question of law-Whether a statutory body, like a Municipality, under the A.P. Municipalities Act, is covered by the provisions of the E.S.I. Act, particularly, in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Municipal Committee, Abohar v. Regional Commissioner : (1996) 7 SCC 488?This Court in C.M.P. No. 394 of 2006 granted interim stay on the aforesaid date, 10.3.2006.3. Sri S. Nageswara Reddy, learned Counsel representing appellant had taken this Court through the grounds of the civil miscellaneo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-10-2009
Reported in : 2009(6)ALT784
B. Chandra Kumar, J.1. Since both the Appeals arise out of the same accident and common order, dated 05-01-2004 in O.P. Nos. 595 and 300 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Mahabubnagar, respectively, they are being disposed of by this common Judgment.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in the Tribunal.Sixteen students including both the deceased were proceeding on eight motor cycles on a holiday trip. The deceased G. Prashanth Reddy and B. Ravi Kumar, both aged about 21 years, were proceeding on a motor cycle bearing No. AP 04/6504 on 01-05-1995 from Tumkur, Karnataka State, to Kemmanannagundi. The deceased Prashanth Reddy was driving the said motor cycle and the deceased Ravi Kumar was the pillion rider. When they reached Guddadapalaym gate and proceeding along with the left side of the national highway at about 3-15 p.m., the tourist bus bearing No. KA 03/5252, owned by the first re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-03-2009
Reported in : 2009(3)ALT260
ORDERG. Bhavani Prasad, J.1. The insurer filed the petition for review of the judgment, dated 12-10-2007 in C.M.A. No. 380 of 2006.2. The review petitioner desires to have the judgment reviewed on the ground of the assessment of loss having to be confined to the supervisory capacities only and the contribution by the deceased having to be assessed at a much lower level than two-thirds of the income in case of an agriculturist and a business man. The reliance placed by the Court on the charge-sheet also has to be reconsidered and hence, the review petition relying on the precedents cited by the learned Counsel for the review petitioner in the grounds of review and his written submissions.3. Sri Kota Subba Rao, learned Counsel for the review petitioner in his oral and written arguments desired preference to be given to Ex.A-2 first information report but not Ex.A-1 charge-sheet and when the deceased was not getting any salary, the income from business and agriculture has to be assessed w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on : Nov-30-2009
Oral Order ( As per the Smt Merla Shreesha, Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.D.No.94 of 2006 on the file District Forum Kurnool opposite parties preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainants husband S.Krupakar insured his life with opposite parties under policy bearing Nos.651591662 for Rs.25,000/-, 651616062 for Rs.50,000/-, 651616098 for Rs.20,000/- and 651615853 for Rs.25,000/-. The policy holder S.Krupakar died on 24.5.2002 due to chest pain and the death is a natural one. Thereafter the complainant submitted claim form as nominee to opposite parties but the opposite parties did not pay the policy amount inspite of several representations. On 20.3.2003 the opposite party no.3 repudiated the complainants claim on the ground that the policy holder suppressed the material fact regard his health. Hence the complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to pay the policy amounts along with interest, compensation and costs. Opposit...
Tag this Judgment!