Andhra Pradesh Court June 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.
Pentapati Venkata Suryaprakasa Rao and anr. Vs. Abdullah Saheb and anr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP106
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This civil miscellaneous second appeal has been placed before a Bench by our learned brother Bhimasankaram J. as, in his opinion, it involved two questions of law, namely (1) as to the interpretation of Section 47 C. P. C. and (2) as to the effect of an attachment on a partition suit subsequently filed. 2. The short facts of the case leading up to these questions are these. The first respondent, an endorsee of a promissory note made by a Hindu father obtained a decree on the foot of that note in O. S. No. 54 of 1937 (D. M. C. Eluru) against him. Originally, he imnleaded the sons, who are the appellants before us, as well as the grandsons of the maker of the note as defendants 2 to 5. But before the decree was passed, he gave them up with the result that the suit was dismissed against them and judgment was entered only against the father, the first defendant, on 24-1-1938. In execution of that decree, the first respondent attached the family property in dispute ...
Poluru Ranga Rao and ors. Vs. Koppolu Ramadoss and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP182
1. The controversy that has arisen in these appeals has to be answered with reference to Sections 144 and 2(12) of the Civil Procedure Code. The matter came up before our learned brother, Umamaheswaram J., and he referred it to a Bench as the value of the properties, which are the subject-matter of these appeals, is more than Rs. 10,000/-.(2) The question arises in the following circumstances :The trustees of the temple of Sri Chennakesava-swamy of Polur village, Guntur district, instituted O. S. No. 5 of 1940 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Tenali, for recovering possession of 13 acres of inam dry land, alleging that the property was originally attached to Devadasi service and on the abolition of the service, it reverted to the temple. The alienees from the Devadasis were the defendants in the suit. The trial Court decreed the suit and in execution proceedings the trustees entered possession on 7-4-1946.The decree was confirmed by the lower appellate Court; but on Second Appeal...
Sri Rama Purchase and Sale Society Ltd. Vs. State of Madras (Now Andhr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP36
Bhimasankaram, J. 1. The plaintiff a society represented by its Secretary is the appellant. The original defendant was the State of Madras, hut it is the State of Andhra Pradesh that is now interested in this litigation. The suit was filed for recovery of a sum of nearly Rs. 9,800/- on the ground that it represented a sum illegally collected from the plaintiff by the State under the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The aforesaid amount represents the total of three sums collected respectively for the years 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50. 2. It is not seriously disputed before us that the tax levied for the period commencing from 1-1-1948 and ending with 26-1-1950 was properly leviable having regard to the decision of this Court in Pari Kameswara Rao v. State of Madras, : AIR1955AP129 (A) which followed a decision of the Madras High Court in Louis Dreyfus and Co. Ltd. Madras v. State of Madras, : AIR1954Mad932 (B). The correctness of these decisions, it is said, is being questioned before th...
Sri Rama Purchase and Sale Society Limited Vs. State of Madras (Now An ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1958
Reported in: [1958]9STC761(AP)
Bhimasankaram, J.1. The plaintiff, a society represented by its secretary, is the appellant. The original defendant was the State of Madras, but it is the State of Andhra Pradesh that it now interested in this litigation. The suit was filed for recovery of a sum of nearly Rs. 9, 800 on the ground that it represented a sum illegally collected from the plaintiff by the State under the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The aforesaid amount represents the total of three sums collected respectively for the years 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50.2. It is not seriously disputed before us that the tax levied for the period commencing from 1st January, 1948, and ending with 26th January, 1950, was properly leviable having regard to the decision of this Court in Peri Kameswararao v. The State of Madras represented by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, East Godavari, Kakinada (1955 6 S.T.C. 143; 1955 A.L.T. 168), which followed a decision of the Madras High Court in Louis Dreyfus & Co. Ltd., Madras v. Th...
Jamuna Bai and ors. Vs. Gampina Narayanamurthy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP108
Srinivasachari, J.1. These second appeals have been referred to a bench by our learned brother Umamaheswaram, J. Second Appeal No. 1226 of 1954 arises out of a suit filed for the recovery of Rs. 4,575 claimed by the landlord as arrears of rent due from 1-7-1950 to 31-11-1952 at the rate of Rs. 175 per mensem. The plaintiff-landlord stated that the defendants Nos. 2 to 4 who formed a partnership carrying on business under the name and style of Sri Krishna Ice Parlour and Bakery took the suit premises on rent.It would appear that the rent fixed originally was Rs. 80 per month and this continued till 30-11-1948 when there was an agreement to pay a higher rent, namely, Rs. 125. The rent was Being paid at this rate from 1-12-1948 to 30-6-1950. On 1-7-1950 there was a further agreement to pay a higher rent, namely, Rs. 175 per month. The plaintiff's case is that the defendant paid the rent till 30-6-1950 and failed to pay subsequently.He, therefore, claimed the arrears of rent on the basis o...
Badrivishal Pillie Vs. J.V. Narsing Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP116
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Election Tribunal, Hyderabad, dismissing the petition preferred by the appellant under Sections 80 and 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter called the Act), that the election of the respondent was void for the reason that the appellant's nomination was improperly rejected. Seven candidates including the appellant and the respondent tiled their nomination papers for election from the Begum Bazar constituency to the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly. Ist February 1957, was appointed for the scrutiny of nominations.Both the appellant and the respondent were represented by agents who were advocates at the time of the scrutiny. The agent of the respondent raised an objection to the candidature of the appellant on the ground that the appellant was the managing agent of the Hind Tobacco Company which had a subsisting contract with the Government and as such disqualified as contemplated by Section...
Gadiraju Sanyasi Raju Vs. Kandula Kamappadu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-1958
Reported in: AIR1960AP83
Chandra Reddy, C.J.6. The question referred to the Full Bench is whether Ex. A-6 is a lease within the meaning of Section 17(1)(d) of the Registration Act. The fact's necessary for an appreciation of the relative contentions of the parties may be briefly set out.7. The suit was laid by the appellant on the basis of Ex. A-6 dated 30-5-1955 an agreement to lease permanently properties mentioned therein on certain terms and conditions which would be referred to presently. The answer of the defendants was that the agreement in question was the result of fraud and misrepresentation and that the document relied on should not be received in evidence for want of registration as it fell within the scope of Section 17(1) (d) of the Indian Registration Act. The trial Court over-ruled the objection based on the provisions of the Registration Act, but dismissed the suit accepting the plea of the defendants that the instrument was brought about by fraud and misrepresentation. The aggrieved plaintiff...
Duddu Ellamma Vs. N. Seshadri and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP492
ORDERKrishna Rao, J.1. This is a petition by the 1st defendant to revise the order of the District Munsif, Tirupati allowing an application made by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 396 of 1947 to dismiss their suit as not pressed.2. The plaintiffs brought the suit for sale in enforcement of a mortgage dated 16-3-1935 executed by the 1st defendant's husband. The lower Court passed a preliminary decree for sale. But, on appeal by the 1st defendant, that decree Was set aside and a preliminary decree for taking of accounts of the profits alleged to have been received by the plaintiffs On the suit properties since the date of the mortgage up to 30-6-1947 was passed, on the ground that the plaintiffs had been in possession of the hypotheca and sale could be ordered only if the mortgage debt has not been liquidated from the profits received.The appellate court remanded the suit to the lower court for the taking of accounts. Thereafter the lower court appointed a Commissioner but before he started h...
Sripydah Suryanarayanamurthy Vs. Collector, E. Godavari and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP442
ORDERMunikanniah, J.1. The petitioners are respondents in O.P. No. 106 and O.P. No. 111 of 1950 on the file of the Arbitrator (District Judge) East Godavari, Raja-bmundry, arising out of the references for arbitration in accordance with G. O. Ms. No. 3024, Revenue, dated 23-11-1950, under Section 19(1) of the Defence of India Act made by the Collector, East Godavari, Kakinada. The Special Deputy Collector, Kakinada, while requisitioning the lands of these petitioners under Rule 75-A of the Defence of India Rules in the year 1943, purported to act under the powers conferred on him by G.O. Ms. No. 3519, Public (War) Department, Government of Madras, dated 2-12-1943. The Provincial Government of Madras, as the 'appropriate authority' who requisitioned the lands, thereafter acquired the same. Regarding the compensation payable to the petitioners references have been made to the Arbitrator, viz., the District Judge, East Godavari.2. Before the learned Arbitrator, the petitioners contended t...
Ahmed Ali Khan Bahadur (Died) and anr. Vs. Banguluru Veeralla and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP280
Seshachelapati, J. 1. This is a connected batch of Letters Patent Appeals against the Judgment of Subba Rao. L.P.A. Nos. 67 and 73 to 81 of 1954 are against A.S. Nos. 199 of 1948 and A.S. Nos. 352 to 359 and 360 of 1950 on the file of the High Court of Madras which arise out of O.S. No. 16 of 1947 and other 9 connected suits On the file of the Sub-Court, Tenali. Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 68 to 72 of 1954 are against the decision in Civil Miscellaneous Appeals Nos. 442 to 446 of 1948 which arise out of the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Bapatla dismissing E.A. Nos. 27ft to 287 of 1945. L.P. As. Nos. 33 and 34 of 1955 are against the decision of Subba Rao, C. J., in S. As. Nos. 100L and 1130 of 1950 arising out of A.S. Nos. 505 and 506 of 1948 on the file of the District Judge, Guntur against O.S. Nos. 59 and 60 of 194T on the file of the Sub-Court, Bapatla. 2. Though the questions raised in these appeals-are common,, it would be convenient to deal with them separately. W...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »