Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Plaintiff: b v subbarayudu and · Page 1 of about 18 results (0.057 seconds)

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Aug 13 1974

Mohd. BurhanuddIn Vs. Savitri Bai

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-13-1974

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 41, Rule 5

Reported in : AIR1975AP168

Advocate for Appellant : B.V. Subbarayudu, Adv.

ORDERSambasiva Rao, J.1. The question I have to answer in these two revision petitions is whether the executing Court is bound to undo the acts and orders it has done and Passed after the Appellate Court...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 17 1963

Ollala Ambiah Vs. Avadhanula Mallanna

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-17-1963

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 60; Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 - Sections 2, 47 and 104; Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 2 and 5

Reported in : AIR1964AP514

Advocate for Appellant : B.V. Subbarayudu, Adv.

Chandra Reddy, C. J.1. This is an appeal, under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the judgment of Sanjeeva Row Nayudu J., reversing that of the Subordinate Judge, Karimnagar, overruling the objections raised by the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 25 1972

Kahatu Bai and anr. Vs. Khatija Bai and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-25-1972

Subject : PropertyCivil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 39 and 47 - Order 21, Rule 11

Reported in : AIR1973AP35

Advocate for Appellant : B.V. Subbarayudu, Adv.

1. The Judgment Debtors in O. S. 1 of 1961 on the file of District Court, Nalgonda are the appellants here.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may briefly be stated: The respondents 1 to...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Sep 12 1966

Telkoti Ramchandraiah Gupta Vs. Firm Gandham Narayana Gupta and Sons a ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-12-1966

Subject : Banking

Acts : Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 - Sections 31; ;Paper Currency Act, 1910 - Sections 23; Hyderabad Paper Currency Act - Sections 15

Reported in : AIR1968AP325

Advocate for Appellant : K. Malipati Rao, Adv.

ORDER1. O.S. No. 72 of 1964 was filed to recover money due on a dishonoured hundi executed by the defendant Telkoti Ramchandriah Gupta. The hundi is drawn on Sri Kothur Seethiah Gupta, Osmanganj, Hyderabad, for Rs...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 03 1972

K. Asheram Vs. Abdulla and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-03-1972

Subject : Limitation

Acts : Limitation Act, 1908 - Schedule - Article 182(5)

Reported in : AIR1973AP232

Advocate for Appellant : Sadasiva Rao and ;R.C. Mishra, Advs.

Obul Reddi, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this Letters Patent Appeal is whether, by reason of the executing Court having taken the execution petition out of its file and consigned the same...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 12 1959

N. Balaraju and ors. Vs. the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Through t ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-12-1959

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 166, 226, 238, 255 and 304; Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 - Sections 252, 254 and 677; Hyderabad and Secunderabad Octroi Rules

Reported in : AIR1960AP234

Advocate for Appellant : B.V. Subbarayudu, ;B. Ramachandra Rao, ;B.G. Paropakari, ;P. Ramachandra Rao, ;P. Sanyasi Raju and ;Balwant Rao Paropkari, Advs.

Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The object of all these petitions is to prevent the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation from levying octroi duty on some of the commodities that are brought into the city.2. All the petitioners, except those...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 14 1972

Lothamasu Sambasiva Rao Vs. Thadwarthi Balakotiah

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-14-1972

Subject : Civil

Acts : Stamp Act, 1899 - Sections 35 and 36; Evidence Act - Sections 91; Contract Act - Sections 70

Reported in : AIR1973AP342

Advocate for Appellant : C.V. Deekshitulu, ;V. Jogayya Sarma, ;B.V. Subbarayudu, ;Satyanarayana, ;Jagannadha Rao, ;B. Anjaneyulu, ;M. Rajasekhara Reddy and ;P. Ramakrishna Raju, ;M. Jagannadha Rao, ;C. Trivikrama Rao, ;A.

Obul Reddi, J.1. The question referred to this Bench of seven Judges by a Division Bench to which two of us ( Obul Reddi and Madhava Reddy, JJ. ) were members, is'Whether a plaintiff can lay...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 04 1971

WaheeduddIn Vs. Mohamooda Begum and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-04-1971

Subject : PropertyCivil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 20, Rule 12

Reported in : AIR1972AP126

Advocate for Appellant : B.V. Subbarayudu, Adv.

ORDER1. This revision under Section 115, Civil P. C. by the 1st defendant is directed against the order and decree dated March 10, 1970 passed by the Sub-ordinate Judge. Nizamabad in I. A. No. 100 of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 01 1958

Balde Mukundayya and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Throu ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-01-1958

Subject : ContractConstitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 226; Hyderabad Abkari Act, 1316 F - Sections 4, 7 and 43

Reported in : AIR1959AP394

Advocate for Appellant : B.V. Subbarayudu, ;R. Sardar Singh and ;B.V. Narasimham, Advs.

Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the order of the Board of Revenue in file No. 45/87/1956, dated 31-7-1957 passed in confirmation of the order...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 16 1964

Kompalli Venkanna and anr. Vs. Chinna Narayana and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-16-1964

Subject : Property

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 21, Rule 62

Reported in : AIR1965AP158

Advocate for Appellant : B.V. Subbarayudu and ;G.J. Appa Rao, Advs.

Chandra Reddy, C.J. (1) This revision petition is referred to a Bench by Justice Venkatesam as he felt that there was conflict of opinion between the Bombay and Calcutta High Courts.(2) The question we are called...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial