Andhra Pradesh Court November 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.
M. Yugandhra Rao Vs. the Govt. of Andhra and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-18-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP506
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the discharge of the petitioner from service. 2. The petitioner was appointed an Executive Officer (Grade III) of the Pamidi Panchayat on 5th June 1952. While he was working as the Executive Officer of Penukonda Panchayat, it was discovered that he committed several irregularities in the discharge of his duties and also misappopriated funds, falsified accounts and manipulated the records. Pending further action against him, he was suspended. On 17th February 1954, charges were framed and served on the petitioner and he was called upon to explain. The petitioner in reply stated that, due to in experience, he committed the irregularities pointed out and prayed that he might be condoned and continued in service. On a consideration of the explanation offered by the petitioner, the Inspector- General of Local Boards discharged him from service on 21st June, 1955. It is to quash this order that ...
Prasada Rao (J.V.) Vs. South Eastern Railway, Waltair (by Dist. Traffi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-1958
Reported in: (1959)ILLJ551AP
Satyanarayana Raju, J. 1. This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, for issuing a writ certiorari to quash the order of the District Traffic Superintendent, Waltair, removing the petitioner from service.2. In the year 1954, the petitioner was employed as the assistant stationmaster at the Waltair Store Depot Station, situated on the South Eastern Railway. There was at the said station a head-on collision between two goods-trains, Nos. 513-Up and 538-Down, on the night of 8 May 1954 at 0-55 hours, resulting in serious loss to the railway. Immediately after the accident at 1-50 a.m., the District Tariff Superintendent made an on the-spot investigation. On 10th and 11th, a committee of senior officers held an enquiry into the cause of the accident. At the enquiry seventeen witness in all were examined. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 12 May 1954. This was followed by a notice, dated 14 May 1954, issued by the District Tariff Superintendent to the petitioner. The...
J.V. Prasada Rao Vs. District Traffic Superintendent, South Eastern Ra ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP618
Satyanarayana Raju, J.1. This is a petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution, for issuing a writ of Certiorari to quash the order of the District Traffic Superintendent, Waltair, removing the petitioner from service.2. In the year 1954, the petitioner was employed as the Assistant Station Master at the Waltair Store Depot Station, situa'cd on the South Eastern Railway. There was at the said station a head-on collision between 'wo good-trains, Nos. 513-Up and 538-Down, on the night of 8th May 1954 at 0-55 hours, resulting in serious loss to the Railway. Immediately after 'he accident, at 1-50 A. M,. the District Traffic Superintendent made an on-the-spot investigation. On 10th and 11th, a Committee of Senior Officers held an enquiry into the cause of the accident. At the enquiry 17 witnesses in all were examined. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 12-5-1954. This was followed by a notice, dated 14-5-1954. issued bv the District Traffic Superintendent to the petitioner. ...
Suryaprakasa Rao (A.) Vs. Labour Court, Andhra Pradesh and Two ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-1958
Reported in: (1959)ILLJ241AP
1. This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order to quash the award of the labour Court, Andhra Pradesh, Guntur, dated 9 November, 1957 in industrial dispute No. 6 of 1957 as notified in G.O. Ms. No. 1212, S.W. & L., dated 20 November 1957, and published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette, dated 28 November 1957. The Government of Andhra Pradesh by G.O. Ms. No. 856, S. W. & L., dated 22 August 1957, referred to the labour Court for adjudication under S. 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the dispute between A. Suryaprakasa Rao (the petitioner herein), owner of bus No, A.D.K. 926 of Vijayawada, and bus-driver S. Subba Rao (the respondent 3 in this writ petition), represented by the City Bus Workers' Union, Vijayawada. The dispute as shown in the annexure to the above Government Order was :(1) 'Whether the termination of the services of S. Subbarao is justified ?(2) If not, to what reli...
Public Prosecutor, (Andhra) Vs. Bhavigadda Thimmiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP207; 1959CriLJ431; [1959]10STC85(AP)
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. These appeals are filed by the State against the acquittal of the respondent and involve the construction of Section 15(b) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act of 1939. The respondent who is a master weaver of Kosagi (Kurnool District) was assessed to sales-tax for the years 1949-50 and 1950-51. The assessments were confirmed by the Sale-tax Appellate Tribunal on appeal. The respondent paid only a portion of the tax and defaulted in payment of the balance.This led the assessing authority to prosecute him before the S.D.M. Adoni. By way of defence, the respondent pleaded that assessment made by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer was not correct. The S.D.M. upheld the objections of the respondent and acquitted him Originally this came on for hearing before a simple Judge who referred it to a Bench having regard to the importance of the matter and the Bench in its turn has placed it before the Full Bench for the same reason.2. The questions that are referred to the ...
S. Chimpiraiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP589; 1959CriLJ1297
ORDERMunikannaiah, J. 1. The short point which arises in this revision application whether while there are no direct witnesses, and when the record before the inquiry Magistrate includes also the alleged account books said to have been forged by the accused the Magistrate cannot proceed with the inquiry without examining the Finger Print Expert, when especially the. accused makes an application under Section 510(2) Criminal Procedure Code. 2. In this enquiry pending before the Judicial 2nd class Magistrate, Ongole, the Assistant Public Prosecutor, Grade II did not want to examine the Finger Print Expert, But the accused filed a petition under Section. 510 (2) Crl. P. C., for summoning the Expert. The Magistrate took the view that the report of the Finger Print Expert is not marked as evidence at that stage in the inquiry, but was only included in the record like any other document filed along with the charge sheet. He therefore dismissed the application of the accused as He felt that i...
Panem Venkanarayana Sastry and ors. Vs. Rajupalli Chinna Yella Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP256
1. The defendants in the three suits O. S. Nos, 521 to 323 of 1951, on the file of the District Munsifs Court, Cuddapah, are the appellants before me. These suits were Instituted separately by the respondents in these second appeals for the specific performance of a contract of sale by directing the execution of proper conveyances by the defendants, of the suit properties. The 1st defendant in all the suits is the owner of the properties. Defendants 2 and 3 are the purchasers subsequent to the alleged agreement. The 3rd' defendant died pending the suit and his legal representative was brought on record.2. The case of the plaintiff is that there was a binding and concluded contract entered into between the plaintiffs in the three suits and the 1st defendant whereunder the 1st defendant agreed to sell the suit properties to the three plaintiffs and that contrary to that agreement he sold the suit proper ties to defendants 2 and 3 who purchased them with the knowledge of the plaintiff's r...
In Re: Narsiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP313; 1959CriLJ689
Umamaheswaram, J.1. As a result of the difference of opinion between Bhimasankaram J. and Sanjeeva Row Nayudu J., as to whether accused 1 to 3 committed the offence of murder under Section 302 I. P. C. read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, on the midnight of 14-3-1958 at Nagraj-pally, Medak District, the Division Bench directed that the case may be heard by a third Judge under Section 429 Code of Criminal Procedure, and the case was accordingly posted before me for delivering my opinion.The reference to Section 429 Code of Criminal Procedure, in the order is stated both by the learned Advocate for the appellants as also by the learned Public Prosecutor to be a slip for Section 378, Code of Criminal Procedure. Though Section 378 Code of Criminal Procedure, enacts that the third Judge before whom the opinions of the differing Judges are laid shall deliver his opinion after such hearing as he thinks fit, I heard tne arguments on both sides in detail and perused the entire evidence as o ...
Pisupati Purnaiah Sidhanthi Vs. Pisupati Satyanarayana Sidhanthi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP657; 1959CriLJ1403
ORDERMunikanniah, J.1. The short point that arises in this Revision petition is whether the Court of Munsif Magistrate, Ongole has jurisdiction to try this case.2. The complainant has alleged against his father that he was defamed as the latter wrote a letter to one Karnam Jayarao Pantulu Garu residing at Doulatabad in Kodangal Taluk, Mahaboobnagar District. Both the complainant and the accused are the residents of Karavadi in Ongole taluk of Guntur District. The letter containing imputations was written on 26-3-58 and sent to the addressee by post and as the addressee was suffering from paralysis, the letter was opened by one of his sons, Shambu Krishnarao and the contents were read out at the direction of the said Karnam Jayarao Pantulu Garu.It is alleged that this highly defamatory letter which is to harm, undermine and ruin the long established reputation of the complainant as an almanac publisher and which already gained publicity was shown to the complainant when he went on tour ...
Mrs. Ratnamma Breganza Vs. Abdul Khader Khureshi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP135; 1959CriLJ296
Srinivasachari, J.1. This case relates to a complaint filed against an advocate, by one Ratnamma on 18-12-1953. The matter was enquired into by the Tribunal of the Bar Council of the Hyderabad High Court but before the aforesaid Tribunal could submit its findings to the High Court, the Hyderabad High Court was abolished and along with it the Bar Council. After the Andhra Pradesh High Court came into being, the said complaint was referred to the Bar Council of the Andhra Pradesh High Court which held a fresh enquiry and has now submitted its findings.2. The brief facts relating to the case are: The respondent herein, an advocate practising in Hyderabad was engaged by the complainant to appear before the Court of Wards, Hyderabad, in the matter of an application filed by one Baptista, praying that the estate of one Braganza who died, be taken under the supervision of the Court of Wards, inasmuch as one Ratnamma in possession of the properties was mismanaging the property to the detriment...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »