Andhra Pradesh Court November 1959 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.
Sriram Venkata Subbarao and Son Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-05-1959
Reported in: [1960]11STC646(AP)
Kumarayya, J.1. This application for revision is directed against the assessment order made on 2nd September, 1955, by the Commercial Tax Officer, Guntur, as confirmed in appeal by the Deputy Commissioner on 4th October, 1956 and finally by the Appellate Tribunal on 28th June, 1957.2. The undisputed facts as can be gathered from the orders passed, so far as they are necessary for the disposal of this revision, may be shortly stated:-The assessee is a firm doing business in cotton at Guntur and Sriram Venkata Subbarao and his undivided son, Sanker Pershad, are its partners, The said firm as purchasing agents of their non-resident principals at Bombay purchased cotton at Guntur. Their usual course of business in this regard was as follows :-They would send market quotations to Bombay daily to their principals. The principals in case of acceptance would close the offer by sending a wire intimating the acceptance at a certain rate. The appellants would then buy cotton at that rate by fixin...
Rai Sahib Ramdayal Ghasiram and Sons Vs. the Government of Andhra Prad ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-05-1959
Reported in: [1960]11STC705(AP)
Kumarayya, J.1. These are two Tax Revision Cases which arise out of assessment proceedings for the years 1953-54 and 1954-55 in T.A. Nos. 214 and 215 of 1957 respectively. The turnover in dispute in both these cases is Rs. 4,07,599 and Rs. 26,92,401 and they relate to the purchases of castor seeds made in the erstwhile Hyderabad State by the Bombay Export Company with its headquarters at Bombay. The castor seed is a commodity taxable at purchase point, according to the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act. The course of business was that the assessee acting as the agents for the Bombay Export Company for taking delivery of the said castor seeds purchased in the Hyderabad State used to pay the purchase price as remained unpaid by the company to the vendors, take delivery and store the same on company's behalf. There was a tripartite agreement between the assessee, the agent and the Bombay Export Company, the principal and also Jitendraprakash Goel of Bombay, the guarantor. Under the terms of...
Koppula Surareddy (Died) and ors. Vs. Koppula Venkata Subbareddi and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-04-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP368
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. These appeals are under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the judgment of our learned brother, Bhimasankaram J., in S. A. Nos. 923 and 924 of 3953.2. The plaintiff is the appellant in both these appeals. He instituted two suits (O. S. Nos. 293 and 294 of 1950 on the file of the D. M. C. Nandyal) impeaching two alienations made by the 1st defendant, under Exhibits B.12 and B.13 dated 27-8-1937, and for a declaration in both the suits that' the relative alienations would not bind the reversion. The facts which have contributed to this litigation lie in a narrow compass and could be narrated in a few words. One Hanumantha Reddy, who was a divided brother of the appellant, had an only son who was afflicted with serious illness and which caused an apprehension in the mind of Hanumantha Reddy that his son might not survive long. He, therefore, made a will dated 18th June 1923 (Ex. B. 45), the relevant contents of which are given, hereunder :'I have a son by name S...
Md. HussaIn Faisi and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-03-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP405
ORDERMunikanniah, J. 1. This application is under Section 561-A Cr. P. C. for quashing the charge framed by the Fourth City Magistrate, Hyderabad against the accused under Section 420, I. P. C. The charge reads:'That on or about 26-6-1959 at Hyderabad you cheated Md. Yakub by dishonestly suppressing the fact of prior mortgage of your house 15-5-570-71 situate in Osmanshahi and dishonestly inducing Md. Yakub to deliver you Rs. 2300/- towards the sale money you had obtained and thereby committed an offence.....What the accused have, according to the charge, to answer is that they dishonestly Suppressed the fact of prior mortgage of the house which they sold in public auction. Qamar Brothers issued a a notice about the auction and also specified the terms subject to which the bids have to be offered or to be accepted. According to those terms, the auction-purchaser should pay immediately, on the conclusion of the auction 1/4th consideration and commission at 5 per cent to the auctioneer a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›