Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Court: andhra pradesh Year: 2011 Page 5 of about 103 results (0.050 seconds)

Nov 28 2011 (TRI)

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Represented by Its Branch Mana ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Nov-28-2011

..... permitting the vehicle to ply on the road without obtaining the fitness certificate which is essential in the teeth of section 66 of the motor vehicles act. the repudiation of the claim by the appellant insurance company is just and valid. the order of the district forum is liable to be set ..... whether a passenger carrying vehicle or a goods carriage unless the owner thereof holds permit within the meaning of sec 2 (31) of the motor vehicles act. 18. in the light of the principle laid by the natinal commission and the honble supreme court, we hold that the respondent has violated the ..... repudiation of the claim holding that conditions of the permit does not allow carrying of dangerous or hazardous goods. 13. section 66 of the m.v.act deals with the necessity of permit for a transport vehicle in any public place. it reads as under: 66. necessity for permit: no owner of ..... in the absence of fitness certificate, the respondent cannot ply the vehicle and if he does it amounts to violation of provisions of the motor vehicle act which in turn is breach of conditions of the insurance policy. 11. the learned counsel for the appellant insurance company has contended that there was ..... division of air freight limited and that the supreme court held that parties to contract are bound by the terms of the contract. the respondent had violated the terms of the insurance policy and the provisions of the motor vehicle act. if the insurance company is liable to pay any amount under the insurance policy .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 2011 (TRI)

Dr. G. Jaya Prakash Vs. Sk. Hameed Khan

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Dec-21-2011

..... and that they should exercise reasonable care in the discharge of their duties. in general, a professional man owns to his client a duty in tort as well as in contract to exercise reasonable care ingiving advise or performing services ? . supreme court then opined as under: ??the skill of medical practitioner differs from doctor to doctor. the very nature of the ..... due care and caution. medical opinion may differ with regard to the course of action to be taken by a doctor treating a patient, but as long as a doctor acts in a manner which is acceptable to the medical profession and the court finds that he has attended on the patient with due care, skill and diligence and if the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 2011 (TRI)

Dr. G. Koulaiah Vs. J. Srinivas

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Nov-30-2011

..... and that they should exercise reasonable care in the discharge of their duties. in general, a professional man owns to his client a duty in tort as well as in contract to exercise reasonable care in giving advise or performing services ? . supreme court then opined as under: ??the skill of medical practitioner differs from doctor to doctor. the very nature of ..... due care and caution. medical opinion may differ with regard to the course of action to be taken by a doctor treating a patient, but as long as a doctor acts in a manner which is acceptable to the medical profession and the court finds that he has attended on the patient with due care, skill and diligence and if the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 2011 (TRI)

K. Satyanarayana Vs. Kanchiraju Raja Ram and Another

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Jul-20-2011

..... .2 in favour of the complainant. 8. the opposite party no.1 has filed the appeals on the same grounds that had been the pleadings there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the opposite partyno.1 and that the suit o.s.no.2138 of 2007 had been pending before the court ii addl. senior civil judge, ranga ..... .9.2007 before the ii addl. senior civil judge, ranga reddy district. the relief for delivery of property is a matter to be decided under the provisions of specific relief act and as regards to the construction of the flats, there is no agreement between the complainant and the opposite party no.1. 6. the complainant has filed his affidavit and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 2011 (TRI)

M/S Sai Ram Builders Rep. by Its Managing Partner Sri Pasala Gangadhar ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Mar-29-2011

..... as also on account of non-payment of excess amount orally agreed to be paid by the complainant. 5. the third opposite party has contended there is no privity of contract between him and the complainant and his undivided property to the complainant. it was contended that the third opposite party is not liable for the ..... acts of the opposite parties no.1 and 2 as also that no relief had been claimed against him. 6. the complainant has filed his affidavit and got marked exs.a1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 2011 (TRI)

Smt. Vitthala Usha Rani and Another Vs. M/S. Vishal Projects Ltd.

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Jan-17-2011

..... earlier pointed out unerringly indicate that the complainants did not pay the amounts as stipulated under the agreement. there was latches on their part in fulfilling the terms of the contract, however, there was no provision under the agreement to forfeit the amount. what all the builder is entitled to is interest if there is any delay. the builder is equally ..... for consideration are : i. whether the complainants had adhered to the terms of agreements of sale? ii. whether the opposite party was at latches in not performing its part of contract? iii. whether the complainants are entitled to any relief? iv. if so, to what relief? 6) it is an undisputed fact that the opposite party a builder executed two agreements ..... . the honble supreme court in lourdu david vs. louis chinnaya arogiaswamy reported in air 1996 sc 2814 (1) considering section 20 of the specific relief act observed : by virtue of ??section 20 of the specific relief act, 1963 the decree for specific performance is in the discretion of the court but the discretion should not be refused arbitrarily. the discretion should be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 2011 (HC)

Kota Sivaram Prasad. Vs. Nagandla Veera Brahmam and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-07-2011

..... date, on which the party, who is under obligation to perform his part, had refused to do so, under article 54 of the schedule to the act. in the absence of any averment in the contract, such demand is required to be made before expiry of three years from the date of agreement. it is only when a stipulation exists to the ..... them to execute the sale deed and since they did not take any steps, the suit was filed. he expressed his readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract.2. the appellant and the 3rd respondent filed a written statement opposing the suit. it was stated that the property was owned by their mother by name chandramathi, who purchased ..... substantial questions of law arise for consideration:(a) whether it is not the obligation of a trial court to examine the question of limitation, under section 3 of the imitation act, when a suit for specific performance is filed beyond 3 years from the date of agreement of sale; and(b) whether the husband of a woman can enter into an ..... during his lifetime. however no suit was filed as long as venkateswarlu was alive.10. section 3 of the limitation act places obligation on the courts to examine whether the suit was filed within the period of limitation stipulated under the act. if the averments in the plaint indicate that the suit was filed beyond the stipulated period of limitation, the plaint .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 2011 (TRI)

M/S. Navya Chaitanya Housing (P) Ltd., Rep. by Its Managing Director V ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Nov-29-2011

..... in sai laxmi nagar on payment of balance amount, but did not do so. it is the complainants case that the opposite party failed to perform his part of the contract which constitutes deficiency of service on behalf of the opposite party. it is the appellant/opp.partys case that the company has become defunct. we observe from the record that ..... the opposite party did not cancel the membership of the complainant nor refunded the amount and therefore the cause of action as per article 54 of the limitation act is continuing as the date of limitation begins from the date on which the agreement is cancelled which in the instant case did not take place. therefore we are of ..... notice was sent to the opposite party it was returned as ??addressee left without instructions. it is the last known address and as per section 28(a) of c.p.act notice is served on the last known address and there are no instructions given by the opposite party, it is deemed to be served. except for stating that the company .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 12 2011 (TRI)

Shaji M.K. Vs. the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Trai), Rep. b ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Oct-12-2011

..... of south central railway extended facility of mobile telephone connection from m/s. tata tele services, wherein he had cug facility. alleging that contrary to the terms of the contract between the south central railway and tata teleservices the latter has been collecting amounts by issuing bills. when he sought for those bills, they did no furnish, and that ..... tele services as well as south central railway, he sought for compensation. 12) it is an undisputed fact that r1 trai is constituted under telecom regulatory authority of india act. the act itself provides an appellate authority empowering to adjudicate disputes between service provider and a group of consumers. it is vested with both legislative and regulatory functions. by no stretch ..... of his privacy, wastage of time and costs. 3) r1 (trai) resisted the case on the ground that the complaint is not maintainable under the consumer protection act. the trai act itself provides an appellate authority empowering to adjudicate disputes between service provider and a group of consumers. it is neither a seller of goods nor service provider. the consumer ..... provided therein. the honble supreme court in general manager, telecom vs. m. krishnan held that the consumer fora have no jurisdiction to decide the issues arising under indian telegraph act, and the customers have to approach the arbitrators for redressal of their grievances. while obtaining the telephone connection it has opted for various services that are being provided by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 05 2011 (TRI)

National Insurance Company Ltd. and Another Vs. Sambhavi Engineers

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Jul-05-2011

..... or others are proposed to be covered, an additional premium is required to be paid for covering their life and property ? . following the above decision, we may state herein that contract of insurance pertaining to excavator is governed by terms and conditions of the policy. the terms of the policy and also the quantum of the premium payable for insuring the ..... . the honble supreme court in new india assurance company ltd. v. sadand mukh, reported in iii (2009) slt 300=ii (2009) acc 432 (sc)=observed that ??the provisions of the act, therefore, provide for two types of insurance ??one statutory in nature and the other contractual in nature. whereas the insurance company is bound to compensate the owner or the driver .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //