Ratakonda Raghu Naidu v. Kolla Sivaram Prasad (2003) (2) ALD (Crl.) 956 (AP) - The case is frequently cited in legal arguments, primarily concerning the application and interpretation of legal provisions, such as those under the Money Lenders Act. The judgment emphasizes that the decision relied upon by the complainant in this case has no bearing in certain contexts, suggesting that the ruling may not be applicable universally or in specific factual scenarios Ratakonda Raghu Naidu VS Kolla Sivaram Prasad - Andhra Pradesh, S. Parameshwarappa VS S. Choodappa - Bombay, Tammana Seetaramanjaneyulu Died Per L.R. vs Chittimalla Sudhakar Rao R/o Srikrishna Colony, Warangal DT - Telangana.
Legal Interpretation of Money Lenders - The case clarified that under Section 2(7) of the Money Lenders Act, a money lender is one whose primary business is advancing money, not casual or occasional lenders. This distinction is critical in legal disputes involving money lending practices S. PARAMESHWARAPPA VS S. CHOODAPPA - Karnataka.
Judicial Precedents and References - The case has been referenced alongside other judgments, such as Rotakonda Raghu Naidu vs. Kolla S. Prasad (2004), indicating its importance in legal discussions related to criminal and civil liabilities, and the applicability of specific legal principles Rotakonda Raghu Naidu VS Kolla S. Prasad - Dishonour Of Cheque, ARMSTRONG BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS VS VISHVANA THNAIK - Dishonour Of Cheque.
Analysis and Conclusion:
Ratakonda Raghu Naidu’s case is a significant legal precedent in Andhra Pradesh, particularly concerning the interpretation of the Money Lenders Act and the scope of applicable decisions. The case underscores that judicial decisions must be carefully considered for their relevance and applicability to specific factual circumstances. It also highlights the importance of distinguishing between casual lenders and those engaged in a regular business of money lending when applying legal provisions. Overall, the case serves as a reference point for legal arguments involving the scope of liability and the application of statutory definitions in criminal and civil law.
In that view, the decision relied upon by the complainant in Ratakonda Raghu Naidu's case (supra), has no application. ... In support of his argument, learned Counsel relied upon the decision of this Court in Ratakonda Raghu Naidu v. Kolla Sivaram Prasad and another, 2003 (2) ALD (Crl.) 956 (AP). He thus prayed to allow the appeal and set-aside the judgment of the Trial Court.
Learned Counsel has also relied upon the decision in Ratakonda Raghu Naidu v Kolla Sivaram Prasad and Another4, to contend that as per Section 2(7) of the Money Lenders Act, Money lender is only those persons whose regular business is to advance monies and not those who advances money casually and also
Learned counsel has also relied upon the decision in Ratakonda Raghn Naidn Vs.
In support of her contention, learned counsel relied on the judgment in Ratakonda Raghu Naidu Vs Kolla Sivaram Prasad and another , 2003 (2) ALD (Crl) 956 (AP), wherein the relevant para reads as under : “Learned Counsel for the appellant relied
In that view, the decision relied upon by the complainant in Ratakonda Raghu Naidu(cid:146)s case (referred supra) has no application. ... In support of his argument, learned counsel relied upon the decision of this Court in Ratakonda Raghu Naidu v. Kolla Sivaram Prasad and another2. He thus prayed to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the trial court.
In this context, reference to the case of Rotakonda Raghu Naidu vs. Kolla S. Prasad, 2004(4) Crimes 295 could be made.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.