Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-25-2009
Reported in : 2009(6)ALT26
1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the Civil Revision Petition arise out of the common judgment dated 29-10-1999 passed in O.P. No. 43 of 1993 and O.S. No. 241 of 1993 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Sangareddy, whereby and where under the learned Senior Civil Judge made the award dated 31.7.1993 passed by the arbitrator as a rule of court while dismissing O.P. No. 43 of 1993 filed under Section 30 of Indian Arbitration Act to set aside the award passed by the arbitrator.2. In order to appreciate the controversy raised in the present proceedings, the relevant facts may be stated, in brief:Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Ramachandrapuram (hereinafter referred to as the employer) issued tender notice bearing No. SSO/MW/79 for the work of breaking cast iron scrap and loading the same into dumper. In response thereto, P. Gopinathan (hereinafter referred to as the claimant) offered his tender. His tender came to be accepted by the employer, which ultimately resulted in execution of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-09-2009
Reported in : 2009(6)ALT559
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. This batch of Writ Appeals arise out of common order dated 9-6-2000 in Writ Petition Nos. 1615, 2176 and 3521 of 1997 passed by the learned single Judge.2. While Writ Appeal Nos. 1380, 1381 of 2000 and 78 of 2002 have been filed by the Muthukur and Veligodu Villages Mosques, (for short 'the Mosques'), represented by their Mutawalli; Writ Appeal No. 1485 of 2000 has been filed by the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 2176 of 1997.3. For convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the Writ Petitions.4. The facts are briefly summarized hereunder:Certain properties, which belong to the Mosques have been in occupation of the petitioners. Proceedings were initiated under the provisions of Section 36-B of the Wakf Act, 1954 (for short 'the Act') by the Secretary of A.P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad (for short 'the Board'), by giving requisition to the District Collector, Kurnool, for passing orders of recovery and delivery of possession of the said...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-28-2009
Reported in : 2009(6)ALT509
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. These Writ Petitions raise identical issues of fact and law. Therefore, they are heard and being disposed of by this common judgment.2. In all these writ petitions, the petitioners have called in question the legality and propriety of the action of the respondents in seeking to apply Memo No. 5217/Reforms/06, dated 23.02.2006 pertaining to collection of EMD, retention amount and its release.3. Barring the dates, the value and the nature of the contract works, the facts in broader sense are similar to each other in all these cases. The petitioners are engineering contractors registered with the Government of A.P. and carrying on works in various departments. Each of these petitioners was awarded with contract works through tender process. Agreements were entered into on behalf of the Government of A.P. by the respective departments, which entrusted the works to the petitioners prior to 23.02.2006, on which date the abovementioned Memo was issued by the State G...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-25-2009
Reported in : 2009(3)ALT485
ORDERNooty Ramamohana Rao, J.1. This application has been moved seeking intervention for constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal and for referring the disputes that have cropped up between the parties for resolution to the said Arbitral Tribunal.2. The applicant Company is engaged in implementing a 330 MW Hydro Electric Power Project located on the river Alaknanda, at a distance of about 110 kilometers from Rishikesh Rail Head, along with Rishikesh - Badrinath National Highway No. 58. The Project aims to utilize a head of around 66m for power generation. The profile of the Project has been described in the bid document in the following manner:330 MW Shrinagar Hydro Electric Project consists of a main Dam with Diversion Tunnel on the left flank of the river Alaknanda and Intake Tunnels on right flank connected to the 2 Nos. Head Race Tunnels leading to the Supana Aqueduct discharging into Desilting Basin. The Power Channel takes off from the desilting basin which discharges into the Foreb...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-12-2009
Reported in : 2009(2)ALT402
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J1. These two writ appeals arise out of orders dated 24.07.2008 and 21.07.2008 in WP. Nos. 8889 of 2008 and 2183 of 2008 respectively.The background facts:2. The lands belonging to the respondents were acquired, as they were coming under foreshore submergence of Somasila Project. In respect of the lands of the respondents in W.A. No. 1765 of 2008, a common notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was published on 22.02.1994 and for the lands of the respondents in WA. No. 1785 of 2008, a similar notification was issued on 11.02.1994. Along with the lands of these respondents, lands of others were also acquired under the said two notifications. After following the due procedure, the Land Acquisition Officer (for short, 'the LAO') passed two separate awards covering the respondents in each of these writ appeals respectively in the year 1994. Some of the landowners covered by the two notifications sought for reference to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-23-2009
Reported in : 2009CriLJ1870
G.V. Seethapathy, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment dated 11-2-1999 in S. C. No. 260 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Tirupati, wherein, the respondent herein/accused was found not guilty of the offences under Sections 363 and 376(2)(f) of I.P.C. and was acquitted thereof under Section 235(1), Cr.P.C.2. Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant-State and the learned Counsel for the respondent-accused. Perused the records.3. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:The accused was working as a ball picker in S.V. University Tennis Court, Tirupati, and as such he was having custody of the key of the storeroom situated to the southeast of the tennis court, wherein, tennis net and other articles are stored. The victim girl A. Haritha, is aged 11 years and she belongs to Scheduled Caste. Her mother Sampurnamma is working as maid servant in the red-buildings attached to the S.V. University.On 7-9-1997 at ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-23-2009
Reported in : 2010(1)ALT97
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court issued notice before admission on 10.6.2009 and issued Rule Nisi on 11.8.2009. Counter-affidavit was filed by respondent No. 1.2. Dr. Siva Prasad, writ petitioner filed the present writ petition for a writ at Quo Warranto to set aside the notification issued by the first respondent G.O.Ms. No. 418 PR & RD (Elections and Rules), dated 06.9.2007 implementation of which is sought to be justified on untenable grounds in the first respondent's laconic communication, dated 19.02.2009, as stated in para 13 and thereby declaring the said notification as illegal so far as the appointment/nomination of second and third respondents as members of the District Planning Committee, Anantapur, is concerned and consequently direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner for appointment/nomination as member of the District Planning Committee, Anantapur, under 'Experts' category and pass such other suitable orders.3. Though respondents 2 and 3 had been served, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-06-2009
Reported in : 2009(1)ALT754
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.Competing interpretations of recurrent-contemporaneous events:1. Since the inception of the naxalite movement in Andhra Pradesh in 1969, 551 police personnel were killed including one DIG, two S.Ps, five D.S.Ps; 16 Inspectors and 49 Sub-Inspectors. 2928 civilians were killed; public and private property worth hundred of crores of rupees was destroyed; the extremist groups indulged in mindless violence and committed brutal murders. The naxal violence increased since 1991. They deliberately ambush and attack police with sophisticated firearms and explosives. In order to create terror the Maoists are also targeting functionaries of ruling political parties and killing them brutally - (counter affidavit of the Director General of Police in W.P. No. 15419/06 including Annexures 2 and 7)2. The State Executive for the first time started extra-legal killing which is popularly known as Encounter since 1968 and as on today in the name of alleged encounter the State has snat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-05-2009
Reported in : 2009(5)ALT67
V.V.S. Rao, J.Introduction1. This appeal by plaintiffs is against Judgment and decree in O.S. No. 285 of 1983, dated 31.03.1989 on the file of the Court of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Ranga Reddy District. The journey of the suit started in 1959. Moving from original Court to appellate Court and then from original Court to another, the case so far spent about fifty years in judicial system. There is no hope that this journey would stop with this Judgment. Nevertheless, learned Counsel for both sides argued with admirable effort leaving no point untouched. Plaintiffs' suit is for declaration and for consequent correction of revenue entries, which was dismissed holding that the plaintiffs' branch and defendants' branch are entitled to property. Case and counter case is stated infra by referring to parties as they are arrayed in the suit.From 1959 to 19892. Plaintiff Lalitha Pershad filed suit being O.S. No. 51/1/1959 on 17.09.1959 on the file of the Court of the Munsif Magistrate (W...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-19-2009
Reported in : 2009(6)ALT802
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. On 23.7.2009 this Court initially directed the matter to appear in the list on 31.7.2009 at 2-15 p.m. and till then it was directed that the status quo obtaining as on that day be maintained by the parties. On 31.7.2009 this Court issued Rule Nisi and the status quo granted earlier on 23.7.2009 was extended until further orders.2. The first respondent-contesting respondent filed W.V.M.P. No. 2401 of 2009 praying for vacation of the interim order specified supra.3. Heard Sri C. Raghu, learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner, Sri E. Madan Mohan Rao, learned Counsel representing the first respondent in the writ petition and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing respondents 3 to 8.4. The counsel on record at this stage made a request for final disposal of the writ petition and, hence, the writ petition was heard finally by this Court and the same is being disposed of finally.5. The petition...
Tag this Judgment!