Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Batchu Veeraiah Vs. Chepuri Sarraju
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP100
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. This second appeal has been referred to a Bench, under the impression that there is a conflict between Vainkuntarama Pillai v. Athimoolam Chettiar, JLR 38 Mad 1071: (AIR 1914 Mad 641 (2)) (A) and Hanumantha Rao v. Sitharamayya, ILR 1939 Mad 203: (AIR 19-39 Mad 106) (B).2. The facts leading up to this litigation may be briefly set out. The father of the respondent (1st defendant) executed two promissory notes, Exs. A-1 and A-2 dated 19-5-1939 and 20-10-1939 respectively. On his death, his widow, i.e., the mother of the 1st defendant, renewed these two promissory notes by Exs. A-3 and A-5 elated 17-5-1942 and 20-8-1942 respectively as the minor's guardianIn 1945 the maternal grandfather of the 1st defendant renewed them again by Exs. A-4 and A-6 dated 16-5-1945 and 9-8-1945 respectively. A consolidated promissory note (Ex. A-7) was obtained by the plaintiff from the 1st defendant (i.e. the respondent) on 15-5-1948, in renewal of the prior promissory notes. On th...
Tavva Venkata Gurunadha Rao Vs. Badam Rosaiah (Died) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP277
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The applicability of Sections 65 and 72 of the Indian Contract Act is involved in the 2nd appeal.2. The facts contributing to this litigations may be briefly stated. The appellant before us took a wife in 1941. She deserted him for reasons which are not quite explicable and which need not be gone into in this appeal. So, he instituted a suit for restitution of conjugal rights and also obtained a decree in that behalf. But she did not obey the decree and the plaintiff did not seek to execute it.Eight years thereafter, i.e., on 19-6-1949, he married again the third defendant, who was at that time about fourteen years old. The marriage was consummated and they lived as man and wife for some months. Later on, he filed a petition for the custody of his minor wife under the Guardians and Wards Act alleging that her parents took her away without his knowledge and consent.This petition was opposed inter alia on the ground that as the marriage of the plaintiff with the ...
S. Srinivasulu Vs. P.V. Subbamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP517; 1959CriLJ1137
ORDERJaganmohan Reddy, J.1. This is a revision to quash the trial against accused-petitioner applying the principle of Section 403, Criminal P. C.2. A complaint was filed by one Subbamma on 22-9-1955 alleging that the accused, Sirigiri Sriniva-sulu, who was assisting her and occupying a position of confidence, pledged in a Bank on two different occasions certain jewellery entrusted to him on her behalf; i.e., on 4-1-1954, he pledged two silver plates and two gold pieces and one gold chain on 30-12-1954. The first pledge was redeemed in June, 1954 and the second one in April, 1955.It was the case of the complainant that the accused forged two documents purporting to bear her signature, used them knowing them to he forged, got the jewels redeemed and committed criminal breach of trust. The Magistrate committed the accused having framed charges under Sections 406, 467 and 465 read with 471 in respect of the first transaction and with respect to the second the accused was charged under Sec...
Mirza Nowsherwan Khan and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP444
Basi Reddi, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari to quash certain notifications and orders issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh and the Land Acquisition Collector, Hyderabad, under the Hyderabad Land Acquisition Act (No. IX of 1309 F.).2. The contention on behalf of the petitioners is that the notification under Section 3 (1) of the. Hyderabad Land Acquisition Act, published by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on January 3, 1957, is 'ultra vires' the powers of the Government, and consequently all subsequent proceedings taker, under that Act are null and void and must be quashed.3. Much water has flowed under the bridged since the notification of 3-1-1957, and all that is necessary in this case is to set out the history of the acquisition proceedings and point out the stand, taken by the petitioners throughout those proceedings, to show how untenable this petition is.4. On 3-1-1957, the Government of Andhra Pradesh pub...
Firm of Sivdutt Rai Gulab Rai Vs. the Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-1958
Reported in: AIR1960AP406
Srinivasachari, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the plaintiff who filed a suit for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 21,910/- being the amount of damages claimed by him on account of damage and breakage to the machinery booked at Belgunj Railway Station (G. I. P.) to Hyderabad. The plaintiff alleged that his representative at Aligarh made over to the G. I. P. Railway at Belgunj Railway Station certain machinery for being sent to Hyderabad and that the said machinery was loaded in a covered wagon on 13-7-1946.At the time of the loading it was agreed that the wagon would be weighed at Agra in order to determine the weight of the consignment and accordingly the weight was taken at Agra and the consignment weighed 8 stones 16 cwt. In the ordinary course, according to the plaintiff, the consignment ought to have reached Hyderabad on or about 27-7-1946 but there was delay on the way and the machinery reached Hyderabad only on 27-8-1946. The machinery was received in a badly damaged condition ...
P. Venkanna Chetti and anr. Vs. B. Apparao Naidu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP666
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This appeal is against the order of the Subordinate Judge of Visakhapatnam, accepting a draft of the sale deed filed by the respondent in the following circumstances.2. The respondent obtained a decree against the appellant for specific performance of an agreement to sell certain properties. As the appellant failed to execute a sale deed pursuant to the direction of the Court in the decree, the respondent prepared a draft of the document and put it into Court as required by Order XXI, Rule 34 of the Civil Procedure Code. The Court had the draft served on the appellant together with a notice requiring his objections to be made within a particular time. The appellant seems to have filed objections to the draft.When the matter came on for hearing, the trial Court called upon the counsel for the appellant to point out the objectionable clauses and the draft was also handed over to him. Instead of carrying out this direction of the Court, he filed another draft sale de...
Sultan SalehuddIn Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-1958
Reported in: AIR1959AP73; 1959CriLJ160
Kumarayya, J.1. This is a petition under Section 491, Cr. P. C. and Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of a habeas corpus. Petitioner is the son of the detenue, Abdul Wahed Ovaisi, who was taken into oustody on 14-3-1958 under the order dated 13-3-1958 made by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad under Section 3(1) read with Sub-section (2) of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 (Act IV of 1950). On 37-3-1958 the grounds on which the order was made were communicated to the detenue informing him at the same time that against the order he had aright to make representation to the Chief Secretaryto the Government of Andhra Pradesh within the prescribed period.These grounds were to the effect that the saiddetenue had been 'rousing or attempting to rouse communal passions and creating or attempting to create panic, resentment or hatred in the minds of the Muslims against the State and the non-Muslims as disclosed by his speeches made by him in public meetings' on 5th, 12th, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›