Andhra Pradesh Court July 1955 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Pesala Venkata Subbayya and Bros. Vs. State of Andhra
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-11-1955
Reported in: [1956]7STC242(AP)
Subba Rao, C.J.1. The facts in this revision case are not in dispute and they may be briefly stated. The petitioners are a firm of wholesale dealers dealing in pulses, provisions etc. at Nellore. In respect of the assessment year 1951-52, they elected to be assessed on monthly turnover basis. Monthly returns in Form A-3 were submitted by the petitioners. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, on a surprise inspection, discovered that a turnover of Rs. 1,16,875-12-11 was not included in the return submitted for April and May, 1951. He did not make any provisional assessment month after month separately. Instead, on 31st March, 1953, he made a final assessment for the whole year on a turnover of Rs. 6,56,073-0-8 of which Rs. 2,00,000 was an addition made by him on the basis of supression of turnover in the returns for the months of April and May, 1951. The assessees questioned the validity of that order by preferring an appeal to the Commercial Tax Officer. But the appeal was dismissed. An a...
Yarlagadda Tirupathirayadu Vs. Yarlagadda Venkateswarulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1955
Reported in: 1956CriLJ371
ORDERBhimasankaram, J.1. This Criminal Revision case is by the complainant in C. C. No. 71 of 1954 against the order of the Additional First Class Magistrate Bapatla, declining to frame a charge against the accused under Sections 477-A or 467, I.P.C. together with an offence under Section 408, I.P.C. under which the accused already stands charged. The learned Magistrate was of the view that a charge under Section 477-A, I.P.C. could not be joined with a charge under Section 408, I.P.C. He, therefore, directed the appellant to file a fresh complaint for an offence punishable under Section 477-A I.P.C, as the case may be, if so advised.2. Before going into the point of law, it is desirable to state a few facts. The accused was a clerk of the complainant and was in charge of his accounts and cash. The complainant alleged that the accused in that capacity misappropriated off and on some amounts totalling a sum of Rs. 32,705-9-8 between 6-2-1953 and 18-1-1954. In order to enable him to do s...
In Re: Balabhadra Narayudu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-07-1955
Reported in: 1957CriLJ1211
Umamaheswaram, J.1. This is an appeal preferred under Section 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the order of Sessions Judge, Guntur, in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 131 of 1954 sanctioning prosecution of P.W. 3 in Sessions Case No. 91 of 1953. The simple question that arises for decision in the appeal is whether it is expedient in the interests of justice to sanction his prosecution.2. The ground on which the learned judge ordered sanction to prosecute that his statement before the Sessions Court was contradictory to the statement which he made before the Committing Magistrate. What he stated before the Committing Magistrate was that the 1st accused was near the corpse at the time of the cremation. In the Court of Session he went back upon that statement. That contradiction is not very material and even assuming that the 1st accused was present at the time of cremation it would not establish the guilt of the 1st accused. I agree with Rankin, C. J. in Keramut Ali v. E...
M.S. Nando Vs. Bharat Gowdo and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-1955
Reported in: 1957CriLJ1212
ORDERBhimasankaram, J.1. This Criminal Revision Case has been filed against the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Srikakulam, setting aside the conviction of the accused by the Judicial Sub-Magistrate of Pathapatnam and directing a retrial.2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated thus : - A complaint was made by the petitioner to the Sub-Magistrate of Pathapatnam alleging the commission by the accused of offences punishable under Sections 143 and 379, Indian Penal Code. The complaint petition Itself was entitled an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and it sought an order for investigation thereunder. The Sub-Magistrate registered it as Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 26 of 1953, and directed investigation by the Sub-Inspector of police, Kasibugga. After investigation, the police themselves, filed a charge-sheet against the accused which was taken on file and registered as C.C. No. 6 of 1954, and after due trial, the accused were convict...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›