Posts

Showing posts from November, 2010

LIVING AS WIFE AND HUSBAND MAINTENANCE UNDER SEC.125

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMARCriminal Petition No.5218 of 200721-04-2010Smt. Kummari KamalammaW/o K. AnjaneyuluAged about 30 years, Occ: HouseholdR/o Shakapur Village, Addakal Mandal,Mahaboobnagar district.Kummari AnjaneyuluS/o K. BurrannaR/o. Vemula Village, Addakal Mandal,Mahaboobnagar District and anotherCounsel for petitioner: Mr. A. Narasimha ReddyCounsel for second respondent: Public Prosecutor:ORDER:This Criminal Petition has been filed to quash the order, dated 22-02-2007 in R.P.No.61 of 2006 on the file of theI Additional Sessions Judge at Mahaboobnagar.2. The case of the petitioner herein is that she is the legally wedded wife of the first respondent herein and that she is entitled to claim maintenance. Her specific case is that her marriage was solemnized with the first respondent about 10 years back according Hindu Rights and Customs at Vemula of Addankal Mandal and an amount of Rs.75,000/- was presented to him towards dowry besides five tulas of gold and 70…

HEAVY BURDEN LIES FOR TAKING DIVORCE

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2111 of 200222-04-2010Smt. RekhaB. SusheelendraCounsel for the Petitioner: Sri M. Papi ReddyCounsel for the Respondent: Sri M. Sreenivas:JUDGMENT:- (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice B.N.Rao Nalla)This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against order dated 08.04.2002 passed in O.P. No. 273 of 1999 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad, whereby the petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) and (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for brevity "the Act") for dissolution of the marriage, was allowed. The wife filed this appeal. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in O.P. No.273 of 1999.The marriage between the petitioner-husband and the respondent-wife was solemnized on 09.07.1989 as per Hindu customs and rites. Immediately after the marriage, the respondent joined him at matrimonial home…

AMMONIA NITRATE IS NOT EXPLOSIVE - NO LICENCE IS NEED.

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU Criminal Petition No.3334 of 201026-04-2010O. Sudheer Reddy and anotherState, by Sub Inspector of Police, TalupulaPolice Station, rep. PPCounsel for the Petitioners : Sri O.Manohar Reddy Counsel for the 1st Respondent: Public Prosecutor :ORDER:The petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 are accused of offence punishable under Section 9B of the Explosives Act, 1884. It is a case of possession of Ammonium Nitrate by the petitioners, as per Panchanama dated 20.03.2010. There is no dispute that the petitioners do not possess any licence for possessing the said Ammonium Nitrate, under the provisions of the Explosives Act. According to the prosecution allegations, the said Ammonium Nitrate is meant for use in blasting boulders in stone crusher. The question is whether possession of Ammonium Nitrate without licence under the Explosives Act attracts liability under Section 9B of the said Act. According to the petitioners' counsel, Ammoniu…

sleeping partners of drug manufacturer firm cannot be added as accused

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULUCriminal Petition No.3612 OF 201026-04-2010B. UpenderThe State of AP., rep. by its PPCounsel for the Petitioner : Sri S.Bhooma GoudCounsel for the 1st Respondent: Public Prosecutor:ORDER:This petition is filed by the 4th accused under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing proceedings in C.C.No.512 of 2009 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District relating to offence punishable under Sections 27 (d), 27( c ) and 22(3) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.The Drugs Inspector, Kamareddy filed complaint before the lower court against A-1 to A-4. A-1 is M/s. Sri Mallikarjuna Medical and General Stores, Bibipet village, Domakonda Mandal. A-2 is Managing Partner of A-1. A-3 is Partner of A-1. A-4 is Partner and Registered Pharmacist of A-1. Subject drug in this case is Primolut-N sample. When the sample drug was sent to Government Analyst, Drugs Control laboratory, Hyderabad for analysis, it was found to be of …

GROUND NUT OIL DELAY OF 3 YEARS SEC.13 NOTICE

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMARCriminal Petition No. 1917 of 200827-04-2010Bolisetty Satyanaga bala RajuS/o Late Subba RaoAged 39 years, Occ: Business, R/o H.No.1/321,Main Road, Pedana, Krishna District,Tadepalli Post, Guntur District and anotherThe State of A.P. rep. by Food InspectorDivision-II, Krishna District through Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.Counsel for petitioners: Mr. Ghanta Rama RaoCounsel for respondent: Public Prosecutor:ORDER:This Criminal Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.203 of 2007 on the file of the Special Mobile Judicial First Class Magistrate, Machilipatnam.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The Food Inspector, Division-II, Krishna District, Machilipatnam, along with his staff, visited the shop of the petitioners herein and after following the usual procedure, three samples of Priyanka Gold double filtered Grounut oil were seized and one sample was sent to the public analyst for chemical analys…

MERE DIFFERENCE IN THE DATE OF MARRIAGE - QUASH NOT ARISE

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMARCriminal Petition No. 1153 of 200827-04-2010T.V. Manohar.The State of A.P., rep. by Public Prosecutor,High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and anotherCounsel for the Petitioner: Sri O. Manohar ReddyCounsel for the Respondent No.1 : Public ProsecutorCounsel for the Respondent No.2 : ----:Order:This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioner to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 10 of 2008 on the file of the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati. The second respondent herein is the de facto complainant in the Criminal Case. The de facto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner herein and her case is as follows. She married one A.B. Ram Kumar in the year 1987 and that they were blessed with a male child. It is alleged that the said A.B. Ram Kumar developed illicit relationship with another woman, which led to the divorce between the second respondent and said A.B. Ram Kumar. The spe…

IN THE ABSENCE OF ANIMUS DESERENDI, NO CHEQUE BOUNS CASE SHOULD NOT BE TRUNED AS 420

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMARCriminal Petition No.5259 of 200728-04-2010J. Vidya Sagar S/o L.J. Rajam,Aged 43 years, Occ: Service,R/o 12-1/1, Plot No.1, Road No.1,Ramakrishnapuram, Dilsukhnagar,Hyderabad.State of A.P. through Public Prosecutor,High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and anotherCounsel for petitioner: Mr.P. Shiv KumarCounsel for respondent: Public Prosecutor:ORDER:This Criminal Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.437 of 2005 on the file of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, East & North, R.R. District, transferred to X Metropolitan Magistrate, Malkajgiri, R.R. District.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:The second respondent herein filed a complaint alleging that he is one of the partners in M/s Sai Chakra Financers and M/s Yogeshwara Financers and that the partners were not in a position to uphold the trust of the managing partners and therefore, the firm was dissolved, accounts were settled and a memorandum of u…

OR. 21 RULE 58. SEC.64 . SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAOSecond Appeal No.783 of 200929-04-2010Gopisetti Venkata Lakshmi Narasimharao, S/o.Venkata RamayyaM/s.Sri Satya Financial Services, Narsapuram, represented by its Proprietor, Sri Meka Sreedhar Chowdary, NarsapuramAnd anotherCounsel for appellant: Mr.A.V.Sesha SaiCounsel for Respondents: Smt.Bobba Vijaya Lakshmi:ORDER:The dispute in this second appeal is regarding the validity of attachment of land admeasuring Acs.2.38 (out of Acs.4.20) in R.S.No.628/1 situated at Sarva, H/o.Lakshmaneswaram Village of Narsapuram Mandal in West Godavari District (hereafter, schedule property). Originally the second respondent herein (J.Dr) was owner of the property. She obtained a loan from M/s.Sri Satya Financial Services, Narsapuram (hereafter, D.Hr). When the D.Hr brought the schedule property for sale, in the facts and circumstances of the case narrated hereafter, appellant herein (hereafter, purchaser) filed E.A.No.387 of 2005 under Order XXI Rule 58 of Code of …