Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
Pagadala Chengayya and anr. Vs. Noothanakalva Chenga Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP632
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. The question to be answered by the Full Bench is whether a counter filed by the judgment-debtor within 90 days, in answer to an execution petition of the decree-holder, raising a plea of satisfaction or adjustment of a decree would fulfil the requirements of Order XXI Rule 2 C. P. C. 2. The facts material for the purpose of this enquiry may be stated briefly. The respondent-laid an action for the recovery of certain items of property from the appellants, who are defendants 4 and 5 and some others. The suit was dismissed with costs of the appellants and this was affirmed on appeal. The appellants put into execution the decree for costs in their favour. This was resisted by the respondent on the ground that there was an adjustment of the decree on 14-9-1952 when the 4th defendant for himself and as repre-senting his brother, the 5th defendant, received Rs. 1200/-, Rs. 1000/- being the price of two items of property to be conveyed to them and Rs, 200/-towards ful...
In Re: K.V. Narasinga Rao and Yusufuddin, Pleaders, Karimnagar
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP593; 1959CriLJ1298
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The charge against both the advocates was that they neglected to file an appeal entrusted to them on behalf of one Naraslmhulu by one Balakishtan,2. The case against the advocates-respondents is this: One Shangaram Narasimhulu and some others filed a suit in the Court of the Munsif-Magistrate Huzurabad, for recovery of a piece of land. As the suit was dismissed, the plaintiffs wanted to file an appeal in the Court of the District Judge, Karimnagur. For that purpose, they engaged the first of the advocates Sri K. V. Narasinga Rao, entrusted him with papers and also paid him the necessary expenditure and his remuneration on 30-12-1950. The last date for filing of the appeal was 6-1-1951.On 24-3-1951, Narasinga Rao wrote to the plaintiffs that the appeal was time-barred, that nothing could be done in the matter and that the money and the papers would be returned to them whenever they went to them. Accordingly. Bala-kishtan went to the advocate Sri Narasinga Rao an...
Grandhi Mangaraju, Manager, Brothers Shop and Branches, Rajam, Srikaku ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP604; (1959)IILLJ257AP
ORDERMohd. Ahmed Ansari, J.1. This Writ Petition is by the Manager of a Hindu family firm known as Brothers Shops and Branch, which does business in Rajam, Srikakulam District. The family consists of seven brothers, who claim to he personally attending to their business, and six out of the brothers are still un-divided. They have a main shop which has two branches. In thy main shop as well as in one of its branches the six undivided brothers carry on retail business in a variety of goods including medicines. In the other branch the brother, who is the eldest and has separated, attends to the business in the footwear.Their case in the writ petition is that they do not employ any other person either in the main shop or in its branches, and that as soon as the Madras Shops and Establishments Act, XXXVI of 1947, came into force they declared Sundays as weekly holidays in respect of the main shop and the foot-wear branch shop, Saturdays being such holidays in respect of the other branch sho...
Pemmasani Venkatachalapati Rao and ors. Vs. V. Govindarajulu, Revenue ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP300
ORDERKrishna Rao, J.1. These petitions under Sections 439 and 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code, respectively are directed against the order dated 26-8-1958, of the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Tenali, by which he took cognizance under Section 190(1)(c), Criminal Procedure Code, of an offence under Section 353, Indian Penal Code said to have been committed by the first petitioner and of an offence under Section 355, Indian Penal Code, said to have been committed by petitioners 2 to 5 and issued summons to the petitioners posting the case to 13-9-1958. The facts are briefly these : On 25-2-1958, the Revenue Inspector of Duggirala. Sri V. Govindarajulu, and the Village Munsiff of Chinnapalem, Sri V. Narayana, reported to the Tahsildar of Tenali that when they attempted that day to collect arrears of land revenue at Chinnapalem, they were assaulted by the petitioners.On 26-2-1958, the Tahsildar made a preliminary enquiry examining witnesses and found that there was a prima facie case ag...
Suddapalli Ramaiah Vs. Emani Sambi Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP642
Shinivasachari, J. 1. This reference by a Bench has come before us because of a conflict between two decisions of the Madras High Court with regard to the construction of Section 19(2) read with Section 16 of the Madras Agriculturists Relief (Amendment) Act (Act XXIII of 1948). 2. Certain properties belonged to two persons Yegniah and Hanumantha Rao. Yegniah held a 1/3 share and Hanumantha Rao held 2/3 share in the said properties. These properties were mortgaged with the Chapalamadugu Rangiah who brought a suit on the basis of the mortgage being O. S. No. 39/31 on the file of the Sub Judge, Baptala. A preliminary decree was passed in 1936 for Rs. 43200/- as against (1) Suddapalli Ramamurty; (2) Suddapalli Satyanarayana, (3) Suddapalli Subbarao, (4) Suddapalli Ram-aiah, (5) Suddapalli Venkatramaniah. 3. The defendants 3 to 5 filed appeals against the above decree, and the decree-holder also preferred an appeal. The decree was modified by the High Court and the High Court awarded a sum ...
Pemmasani Venkatachalapati Rao and ors. Vs. Govindarajulu, Revenue Ins ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-1959
Reported in: 1960CriLJ782
ORDERKrishna Rao, J.1. These petitions Under Sections 439 and 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code, respectively are directed against the order dated 26-8-1958, of the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Tenali, by which he took cognizance Under Section 190(1)(c), Criminal Procedure Code, of an offence Under Section 353, Indian Penal Code said to have been committed by the first petitioner and of an offence Under Section 355, Indian Penal Code, said to have been committed by petitioners 2 to 5 and issued summons to the petitioners posting the case to 13-9-1958. The facts are briefly diese : On 25-2-1958, the Revenue Inspector of Dug-girala, Sri V. Govindarajulu, and the Village MunsifE of Cliinnapalem, Sri V. Narayana, reported to the Tahsildar of Tenali that when they attempted that day to collect arrears of land revenue at Chinnapa-lem, they were assaulted by the petitioners,On 26-2-1958, the Tahsildar made a preliminary enquiry examining witnesses and found that there was a prima facie case...
Smt. Bobba Suramma Vs. Smt. Peddireddi Chandramma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP568
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. This second appeal raises some interesting questions under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. We may give a resume of the facts culminating in the second appeal. The respondent, who is an alienee from defendants 6 to 8, the reversioners to the estate of one Devarakonda Bangarayya, laid an action for the recovery of some items of property, including item 1 which is in dispute in this second appeal, Bangarayya died before 1931, leaving behind him his widow, Suramma. The property in question was purchased by Bangarayya on 8-5-1915, under Ex. B. 4. Being unable to find the purchase price, he mortgaged that very property to one Padmanabhudu, the paternal grand-father of the fourth defendant, under Ex. B-l dated 10-5-1915, for a sum of Rs, 700/-. This mortgage was kept alive by subsequent payments. In order to discharge this mortgage and other simple debts, Suramma conveyed this property, under Ex. B-5 dated 3-5-1934...
Nagumantri Sumati Bai and ors. Vs. Jogamma (N.)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-1959
Reported in: (1959)IILLJ270AP
Sanjeeva Rao Nayudu, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Andhra), Madras, directing the distribution of the compensation allowed to the dependants of the deceased workman N. Narayana Rao. While giving Rs. 3,000 to the widow of the deceased workman on her own behalf and on behalf of her two minor children, a sum of Rs. 500 was given to the mother of the deceased workman Srimathi Jogamma, respondent in this application.2. The contention of the appellants is that as the mother is dependent on her other two sons, she should not have been allowed any compensation. It is unnecessary for me to go into this question as once it is granted that the mother is a dependant on the workman it is immaterial whether she had other means of income or not. The order of the Additional Commissioner awarding compensation to the mother is an order that cannot be questioned.3. But the point that now arises is this ; The mother has since died and i...
Kasibhatla Satyanarayana Sastrulu and ors. Vs. Kasibhatla Mallikarjuna ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP45
Seshachalapati, J.1. These three appeals arise out of the final decree proceedings passed in O.S. 32 of 1946, on the file of the District Court, Anantapur. The above suit was instituted by the present appellants for the partition and separate possession of their share in the joint family properties described in plaint schedules A to D, and allotting to them one share and to the defendants 1 and 2 the other share. The case of the plaintiffs is that the father of the 1st plaintiff and the 1st defendant were the sons of one Madhavayya. Madhavayya and his two sons, Ramayya, the 1st plaintiff's father, and the 1st defendant Venkata Subbaiah, constituted an undivided Hindu family owning the joint family properties referred to in the plaint schedules. It is alleged that Madhavayya died in or about 1935, and that even during his life time the 1st plaintiff's father, Ramayya was living separately and that out of 590 acres of land Ramayya was put in possession of 170 acres. It is further alleged...
Kanuri Sivaramakrishnaiah Vs. Vemuri Venkata Narahari Rao (Died)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP186
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This Second Appeal has been referred to Division Bench by our learned brother Bhimasankaram, J., as he felt that an important question of law is involved in it.2. The 1st respondent, who is the plaintiff, laid an action in the Court of the District Munsif, Gudivada, for recovery of 106 hags of paddy or their value Rs. 1,493. The claim arose under the following circumstances. The plaintiff sold some paddy, the subject-matter of the suit, to the 1st defendant at the price agreed between the parties. Defendants 2 and 3, who are not respondents here, are stated to have delivered the bags to the 1st defendant. As the 1st defendant failed to pay the price, the plaintiff was obliged to file the suit.3. The suit was resisted, inter alia, on the defence that at the time of the transaction, there were Ordinances in force known as Madras Food-grains Procurement Order, 1947 and Madras Food-grains (Intensive) Procurement Order 1948, which permitted sale of foodgrains only to p...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »