Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(1)ALD234
ORDERN.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.1. By anrder dated 11-7-1997 we had disposed of V.P.Nos.4991 and 4026 of 1990 setting aside the order passed by the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (for short the Special Court), in L.G.C.NO.32/89, dated 5-3-1990 which was filed by Smt. P. Neelakanteswaramma and four others namely Respondents 3 to 6 in W.P.No.4991/90 against the Petitioners 1 to 10 L.G.C.No.32/90 one SnN.Srinivasa Rao, petitioner in W.P.No.4026/90, 11th Respondent in W.P.No.4991/90 and five other persons namely T. Syam Prasad Reddy, G. Ramesh, V.K.V. Prasad Rao, T. Rama Murthy and K. R. Bhagyanagar Co-operative housing Society Ltd, Hyderabad, in respect of land admeasuring 8866 Sq.yards situated in Yousifguda village, Hyderabad, alleging that the above persons are intended to grab the schedule land which is under the occupation of Smt. Neelakanteswaramma and others. The said land Grabbing Case was contested by both the parlies. The respondents in the said LGC No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(5)ALT108
ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J. 1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 1st respondent in his Proceedings No. B/3/ 418/94 dt. 8-8-1995 confirming the order passed by the 2nd respondent in Proceedings No. J/2994/1987 dt. 11-6-1992 and quash them as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of the provisions of the A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act, 1995 (for short 'the Act') and consequently declare that the respondents 3 to 6 are not entitled for occupancy rights certificate to an extent of Ac. 9.20 gts. out of Ac. 11.35 gts. ir S.No. 168 situated at Nagaram village, Maheswaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.2. The case of the petitioner is that he purchased an extent of Ac. 11.35 gts. of dry land in S.No. 168 situated at Nagaram village through an unregistered sale deed dt. 16-7-1957 from one Mangali Shankaraiah, Mangali Lakshmaiah and others and since then he has been in possession and enjoyment of the sam...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2003)2MLJ526
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. There are ten appeals and two Civil Revision Petitions arising out of a common order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Thanjavur in O.S. No. 6 of 1970 dated 25.9.2001 wherein learned Scheme Judge (Principal District Judge, Thanjavur) appointed certain trustees, both hereditary and non-hereditary, for the administration of a wakf, that is, M.K.N. Madarasa, Adirampattinam. The appeals and Civil Revision petitions have been preferred by the persons who were not selected by the learned Scheme Judge, and we find it almost a common feature that the unsuccessful candidates who were not selected approach this Court against the order of selection at every selection made and the litigation goes on endlessly. It is painful to note that serious allegations and counter allegations have been made by one party against the other and the Courts have interfered on more than one occasion to set right the affairs of the trust so that the trust is properly conducted...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2004(2)ALD1; 2004(1)ALT659
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Ranga Reddy District Sarpanches Association, represented by its President and Convenor Sri Girish Sanghi and others had invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning certain provisions of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and certain Government Orders and Rules by filing W.P. No. 12348/2002. Federation for Empowerment of Local Government by its Presidum Member, Lok Satta by its General Secretary and Dr. Jayaprakash Narayana filed W.P.MP. No. 22300/2003 in W.P. No. 12348/2002 to implead them as Respondents 3 to 5 and in view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application the said W.P.M.P. No. 22300/2003 is allowed and proposed parties are impleaded as Respondents 3 to 5. The contesting parties had put in lengthy pleadings and also placed ample material before the Court in support of their respective contentions. Likewise, Prasanna, Chairperson, District Level Committee, Zilla Parishad, Nalgond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2005AP37; 2004(5)ALD57; 2004(5)ALT814; I(2005)BC330
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The question that arises for consideration in this C.R.P. is, as to whether it is competent for the holder in due course of a negotiable instrument, to institute a suit in a Court within whose jurisdiction the indorsement on the instrument takes place.2. The petitioner filed O.S.No.57 of 1999 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kavali, against the respondents for recovery of certain amount, on the strength of a promissory note, dated 20-09-1995. The promissory note is said to have been executed by the respondents in favour of one Dasari Vajayalakshmi. She, in turn, had indorsed the promissory note in favour of the petitioner on 01-04-1998, for a consideration of Rs.30,000/-, at Kavali. 3. The respondents filed written statement. They pleaded that they did not borrow any amount from Dasari Vijayalakshmi and denied execution of the promissory note. They have also disputed her capacity to lend the amount. One of the contentions raised by them is, th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR2006Ker154; III(2007)BC7; [2006]131CompCas232(Ker); 2006(1)KLT479
K.K. Denesan, J.1. Whether a suit or other proceeding filed by a bank or financial institution as defined in the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short the Act) and pending adjudication before the Registrar of Co-operative Societies under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the Societies Act) would stand automatically transferred to the Recovery Tribunal constituted under the Act? If not, dismissal of the suit by the Registrar, instead of returning the same for presentation before the Tribunal, is not improper resulting in miscarriage of justice? These are the questions for consideration in this Original Petition filed in the backdrop of the following facts.2. Petitioner is a nationalised bank and respondent No. 1 is a co-operative society registered under the Societies Act. According to the petitioner, respondent No. l borrowed a certain sum of money from the petitioner-bank, respondent No. 2 executed agreemen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC3127; JT2006(8)SC1; 2006(8)SCALE257; (2006)7SCC1
Y.K. Sabharwal, C.J.Background1. By this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks to challenge amendments made in the Representation of People Act, 1951 (for short, 'the RP Act', 1951') through Representation of People (Amendment) Act 40 of 2003 which came into force from 28th August, 2003. By the said Amendment Act 2003, the requirement of 'domicile' in the State Concerned for getting elected to the Council of States is deleted which according to the petitioner violates the principle of Federalism, a basic structure of the Constitution.In the writ petition, there is a further challenge to the amendments in Sections 59, 94 and 128 of the RP Act, 1951 by which Open Ballet System is introduced which, according to the petitioner, violates the principle of 'secrecy' which, according to the petitioner, is the essence of free and fair elections as also the voter's freedom of expression which is the basic feature of the Constitution and the subject matter ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : House of Lords
LORD HOFFMANN My Lords, The three appeals 1. These three appeals are principally concerned with claims in tort for economic loss caused by intentional acts (a) In OBG Ltd v Allan [2005] QB 762 the defendants were receivers purportedly appointed under a floating charge which is admitted to have been invalid. Acting in good faith, they took control of the claimant company's assets and undertaking. The claimant says that this was not only a trespass to its land and a conversion of its chattels but also the tort of unlawful interference with its contractual relations. It claims that the defendants are liable in damages for the value of the assets and undertaking, including the value of the contractual claims, as at the date of their appointment. Alternatively, it says the defendants are liable for the same damages in conversion. (b) In Douglas v Hello! Ltd the magazine OK! [2006] QB 125 contracted for the exclusive right to publish photographs of a celebrity wedding at which all other pho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(2)ALT611
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Court issued rule nisi on 19-4-2007.2. Counter affidavits, additional affidavits and reply affidavits were filed and written arguments also were submitted in addition to the submissions made by the respective Counsel in open Court. Certain subsequent events also were brought to the notice of the Court and apart from the material papers initially placed, additional material papers as well had been placed before this Court.3. M/s. Ghanta Infrastructure Limited, a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, represented by its Director Sri M. Raghuveer, filed the present Writ Petition for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings ARG-II/PJ/FY07/04568 dated 12-12-2006 and the consequential proceedings ARG 1/PJ/FY07/04730 dated 22-12-2006 of the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the 1st respondent to accept the bid of the petitioner in respect of the bus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(56)BLJR1292; 2008(3)CTC97; [2008(3)JCR176(SC)]; JT2008(5)SC1; (2008)3MLJ1105(SC); 2008(5)SCALE1; (2008)6SCC1; 2008AIRSCW2899; 2008(3)Supreme331; 2008(2)LH(SC)1534
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J.1. Reservation for admission in educational institutions or for public employment has been a matter of challenge in various litigations in this Court as well as in the High Courts. Diverse opinions have been expressed in regard to the need for reservation. Though several grounds have been raised to oppose any form of reservation, few in independent India have voiced disagreement with the proposition that the disadvantaged sections of the population deserve and need 'special help'. But there has been considerable disagreement as to which category of disadvantaged sections deserve such help, about the form this help ought to take and about the efficacy and propriety of what the government has done in this regard. 2. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, who presided over the Congress Expert Committee emphasized before the Constituent Assembly that the removal of socio-economic inequalities was the highest priority. He believed that only this could make India a casteless and cla...
Tag this Judgment!