Andhra Pradesh Court October 1958 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.
Nelluru Sundararamareddi and ors. Vs. State of Andhra (Now Andhra Prad ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP215
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The question referred to the Full Bench is what is the true construction of Section 9(7) of the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Roytwari) Act (XXVI of 1948) (hereinafter called the Act). The point has arisen with reference to Akkacheruvupadu Shrotriem of Nellore District. After the Act came into operation, the Settlement Officer started an inquiry as required by Section 9 as to whether it is an 'estate' within the meaning of Section 2(7) of the Act.As the original grant was not available, he determined the point on the basis of the Inam Fair Register. That document is marked as Exhibit C-l. It shows that Acres 224-3 cents of wet land and Acres 62-25 cents of poramboke lands in that village were granted to the ancestor of the third respondent. It also disclosed the existence of a minor inam which was devadayam measuring 24 cents granted for conducting festivals and performing service to the Goddess Ankamma Perantalu.From the recitals of that docume...
Thatappa G Vs. Deputy Inspector-general of Police and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1958
Reported in: (1959)IILLJ575AP
Chandra Reddi, C.J.1. This is a petition for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Central Range, dated 23 May, 1953, terminating the probation of the petitioner as sub-inspector of police as confirmed by the sub-Inspector of police as confirmed by the Inspector-General of Police, on 18 January 1954 and by the Government of Andhra, on 27 January 1955.2. The petitioner was entertained as a probationary sub-inspector of police on 11 April 1950, and was in service till on 6 July, 1953. While so, he received a warning on 20 October, 1952 from the District Superintendent of Police that he should improve in his work. Two months later a memo was served upon the petitioner setting out the various charges in respect of offences said to have been committed by him prior to the date of the warning and was required to submit his explanation. On 10 January, 1953 the petitioner sent his explanation with a request that an oral enquiry might be ...
Chandru Chowdary Being Minor by Guardian Father Ramamurthy Vs. the Boa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-10-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP343
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This is a petition for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for records from the Board of Revenue in L. Dis. No. 5422-52 dated 6-12-1952 and to quash the proceedings of the Board or for the issue of a writ of mandamus to the Board of Revenue to hear the parties and dispose of the case according to law.2. The office of the village Munsif of Macha-varam, East Godavari District, was last held by one Venkanna. He died on 30-5-1948. The petitioner, who is the nephew of the said Venkanna, was registered as a minor under Section 10 of the Madras Hereditary Villages Offices Act (III of 1895) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 11-12-1948.Shortly thereafter, i. e., on 3-3-1949, the widow of Venkanna adopted the respondent. Therespondent, as the adopted son of Venkanna, instituted a suit under Section 13 of the Act for registering his name as the next heir to the office after setting aside the registry already made in favour of the petitioner on the ground that ...
ineepakolla Ganiraju Vs. State of Andhra (Now Andhra Pradesh)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-1958
Reported in: [1959]10STC108(AP)
Bhimasankaram1. The judgment of the lower Appellate Court is clearly wrong. There is no provision in the Madras General Sales Tax Act (IX of 1939) which empowers the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer to pass an order under section 16 of the Act stating that an assessee guilty of an offence should pay a particular sum by way of composition. In the present case, he seems to have passed such an order. The only authority vested in him under section 16 of the Act - and it seems to me that the section is incapable of being misunderstood - is to accept by way of composition of any offence a sum of money not exceeding a particular sum. An order under that provision directing the assessee to pay a specified sum would be absolutely ineffective. A guilty assessee might offer to pay a sum and the officer might forbear for the time being from launching a prosecution; but the officer cannot insist upon the assessee paying the sum so offered. It is always open to the authorities to prosecute the offender...
Vellore Govindarajulu Mudaliar Vs. Income-tax Officer, Adoni, and Anot ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-1958
Reported in: [1959]36ITR133(AP)
BASI REDDY, J. - The petitioner is an income-tax assessee. He has filed this application under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Income-tax Officer, Adoni, the first respondent herein, to dispose of the petitioners application filed on April 24, 1956, under section 45 of the Indian Income-tax Act, in accordance with law, and not to treat the petitioner as a defaulter in regard to the payment of penalties levied for the assessment years 1945-48, during the pendency of his appeals I.T.A. Nos. 597 to 599 of 1953-54, on the file of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore.The application dated April, 24, 1956, filed by the petitioner before the first respondent, was in fact considered and disposed of by the latter by his order dated April 25, 1956; but the complaint of the petitioner is that he had not been given a personal hearing by the first respondent in dealing with his application under section 45 of...
Chander Rao (P.M.) Vs. Road Transport Corporation
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-07-1958
Reported in: (1959)ILLJ360AP
1. This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, filed by one P. M. Chander Rao, formerly a driver employed in the Road Transport Department, Hyderabad, for the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to cancel the order passed by the Superintendent, Road Transport Department, No. E5298, dated 29 May 1956/4 June 1956, by which, the petitioner, who had been medically declared unfit for a driver's post, was offered an alternative job of a chowkidar and was asked to intimate whether he was willing to take up the job; and, pending the receipt of his reply, was placed on leave with immediate effect. debiting the leave to his leave account. The petitioner seeks a further direction from this Court to enable him to be taken on service as assistant depot clerk in the Road Transport Department. The contention of behalf of the petitioner is that Superintendent of the Road Transport Department had no power under the rules governing the employees of ...
Berar Oil Industries and anr. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Ta ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-07-1958
Reported in: [1959]10STC199(AP)
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. These revision cases raise common questions of law and can, therefore, be disposed of by one judgment.2. The respondent in T.R.C. Nos. 47 and 48 of 1956 and the petitioner in T.R.C. Nos. 75 to 77 of 1956 is Messrs Thungabhadra Industries Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners). The petitioners purchase groundnuts and convert them into refined oil as also vanaspati. For the years 1950-51 and 1952-53, the company was assessed to purchase tax is regard to certain purchases made by them. It is unnecessary for us to go into the details of the transactions or of the taxes levied thereon, as the findings of fact cannot be canvassed in these revision cases. One of the points presented in these cases is whether tax can be levied on the purchase of groundnut kernel; in other words, whether the word 'groundnut' includes groundnut kernel also. This was answered in T.R.C. No. 44 of 1956 (Since reported as Motilal Hari Prasad and Bros. and Others v. The State of Andh...
Boddepalli Lakshminarayana Vs. Suvvari Sanyasi Appa Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-07-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP530; 1959CriLJ1141
Sanjeeva Rao Naidu, J.1. This in an appeal preferred by the complainant against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Srikakulam, acquitting the accused persons in this case. 2. In the original complaint, there were four accused of which the second and the fourth accused were acquitted by the Judl. Second Class Magistrate, Srikakulam, under Section 251A of the Cr. P. C. Accused 1 and 3 were convicted under Section 380 I. P. C. and sentenced to simple imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 250 each or in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a month. Accused 1 and 3 preferred an appeal against their convictions, to the Sessions Judge, Srikakulam, who, as aforesaid, acquitted them of the charge. Hence this appeal. 3. The facts of the prosecution case are as follows; The complainant, examined as P. W. 1, is the owner of a printing press which was located in the premises of an ashramam known as Srinivasa Asharamam near Dusi village. P. W. 1...
P. Laxmana Rao and Sons (Welcome Hotel, Etc.) Vs. Additional Inspector ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-06-1958
Reported in: (1959)ILLJ5AP
ORDER1. The petitioners are the proprietors of three establishments known as 'Welcome Hotel, ' 'Welcome Coffee House' and 'Welcome Coffee Club, ' situated in Vijayawada town. These three establishments prepare articles of food and drink and cater them to the members of the public who visit them. For the purpose of preparing refreshments and other articles of food and for catering them to customers, the petitioners employ a number of persons. From the year 1950 the petitioners were taking out licences under the Factories Act, 1948, for these three establishments and the provisions of the Factories Act were being applied to them. Those licences were being renewed from year to year and till this writ petition was filed on 18 July, 1956, no objection was raised by the petitioners to the application or the applicability of the Factories Act to these three establishments. In this petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners seek the issue of a writ of mandamus or any ot...
P. Laxmanrao and Sons Vs. the Addl. Inspector of Factories and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP142
ORDERBasi Reddy, J.1. The petitioners are the proprietors of three establishments known as 'Welcome Hotel', 'Welcome Coffee House' and 'Welcome Coffee Club', situated in Vijayawada town. These three establishments prepare articles of food and drink and cater them to the members of the public who visit them. For the purpose of preparing refreshments and other articles of food and for catering them to customers, the petitioners employ a number of persons. From the year 1950 the petitioners were taking out licenses under the Factories Act, 1948, for these three establishments and the provisions of the Factories Act were being applied to them. Those licenses were being renewed from year to year and till this writ petition was filed on 18-7-1956, no objection was raised by the petitioners to the application or the applicability of the Factories Act to these three establishments.2. In this petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution the petitioners seek the issue of a writ of Mandamus ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »