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.
Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad Vs. Angaru Satyam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP205
Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at Bombay has stated a case on the following question:--'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances Of the case and on a proper construction of the provisions of Section 28(1) (c) of Indian Income-tax Act, the penalty of Rs. 4,760/- is leviable.'2. The assessee is the Managing Director of Sitaramanjaneya Transport Co. Ltd., which company declared an interim dividend on the 31st December 1946 out of the profits of the account year 1946. The assessee as a shareholder of that company received Rs. 29,965/- in January, 1947. The final dividend of the company in respect of the profits of 1946 was declared on the 30th June. 1947. On the 11th of September, 1947, the assessee filed a return of his income for the assessment year 1947-48 declaring a total income oE Rs. 455/- only consisting of income from property and some business, but did not disclose the amount of Rs. 29,865/- received in January, 19-47 and which properly ought to be ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad Vs. Angara Satyam.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1959
Reported in: [1959]37ITR230(AP)
JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at Bombay has stated as case on the following questions :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of the provisions of section 28(1) (c) of Indian Income-tax Act, the penalty of Rs. 4,760 is leviable ?'The assessee is the managing director of Sitaramanjaneya Transport Co. Ltd. which company declared an inter in dividend on December 31, 1946, out of the profits of the account year 1946. The assessee as a shareholder of that company received Rs. 29,865 in January, 1947. The final dividend of the company in respect of the profits of 1946 was declared on June 30, 1947. On the 11th of September, 1947, the assessee filed a return of his income for the assessment year 1947-48 declaring a total income of Rs. 455 only consisting of income from property and some business, but did not disclose the amount of Rs. 29,865 received in January, 1947, and which properly ought to be included in the ass...
Sait Pamandass Sugnaram Vs. T.S. Manikyam Pillai and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP59
Srinivasachari, J. 1. This Second appeal arises out of a suit filed by the appellant herein against the respondent) for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 709/6/- on the foot of a promissory note said to have been executed by them on 29-7-1952, for Rs. 625/-. The first defendant remained ex parte while the second defendant resisted the suit on the ground (a) that the pronote was not supported by consideration and (b), that all the disputes between the plaintiff and the defendants, relating to the claims of the plaintiff as against them were referred to the arbitration of two persons of Kumool under an agreement of reference to arbitration dated 1-11-1953. The defendant further alleged that after due enquiry the arbitrators gave their award on 29-11-1953 holding that only a sum of Rupees 2,500 was due by the defendant to the plaintiff. It was urged that since there was a valid agreement of reference to arbitration in respect of the very claim for which the suit was filed and an award had been...
Medichetty Ramakistiah and ors. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP659; 1959CriLJ1404
Bhimasankaram, J. 1. These appeals arise out of Sessions Case No. 11/8 of 1958 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Khammam division. As two of the appellants have been sentenced to death, the sentences have been submitted to us by that Court for confirmation. We have not heard these appeals on the merits because in our opinion, an objection taken by the learned counsel for the appellants as to the manner in which the trial was conducted must prevail and there should be a retrial of the case. 2. We may state however that our decision to direct a re-trial has not been reached without reluctance. A re-trial does not only involve fresh expenditure of public time and money; it also oc-casions considerable hardship to the accused by prolonging the period of uncertainty as to their fate and entailing, at least in cases where they retain counsel of their own, extra expenditure of money for them too. There will be, besides, considerable inconvenience caused to the witnesses, an inconvenience so ...
Bommanaboyina Ramaiah and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-17-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP160
Bhimasankaram, J.1. There are four appellants in this Criminal ap-peal. All of them were convicted on two counts -- one under Section 148, I. P. C., and two under Section 302 read with Section 149, I. P. C. There were six accused originally in the Sessions Court of whom A-3 and A-4 were acquitted. The appellants are A-1, A-2, A-5 and A-6. The case arose out of the death of one Vippala Pamula Reddy, who was a resident of the village of Gummanampad in Guntur District.The village was divided into two rival groups-- one led by the deceased and the other stated to be under the leadership of one Vajrala Peda Venkatareddy. On the morning of 4-5-1957 at about 6 a. m., the deceased was attacked while he went to ease himself into his yard, not far away from his house. A-1 and A-2 along with one China Venkatayya came to the yard carrying spears and proceeded towards the spot where Pamula Reddy was squatting.Seeing them, the deceased got up and ran towards the east. But the pursuers cried 'Where a...
The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Korukonda Bhattaru Appalacharyulu and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP610
Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. The question referred to the Full Bench by a Bench of this Court consisting of Ummaheswaram and Ranganadnam Chetty JJ. is as follows : 'Does the burden of proof lie upon the tenant or the landlord to show that the grantor reserved some interest in the land and granted the minor inam subsequent to the grant of the major inarn in cases falling under Section 3(2)(d) of the Madras Estates Land Act?' 2. The learned Judges felt that there was a conflict between the decision in Rama Rao v. Linga Reddi, 1956 Andh WR 89: (AJR 1957 Andh Pra 632) and the two unreported decisions of this Court in Appeal No. 1217 of 1953, D/- 26-11-1958 and Appeal No. 406 of 1954, D/- 27-11-1958 and thought that the conflict should be resolved by a Full Bench. 3. The question referred to us arises in the following circumstances. A suit (O. Section No. 62 of 1953 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Srikakulam) was instituted for a declaration that village of Potli is not an estate wi...
Midde Varaprasada Rao Vs. Collector of Krishna
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP650
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, namely, the Board of Revenue, Andhra Pradesh, under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act.2. The reference arises in the following circumstances. A document was executed on 28-2-1950, styled as an agreement between one Midde Varaprasada Rao on the one hand and Kanukolanu Venkatasubrahmaniam, Kanukolanu Venkata Nara-simha Rao, Subbineni Raghavayya and Thummala Kumaraswam; on the other. The purpose of the document was the completion of the construction of an unfinished cinema hall and the subsequent management of the said cinema hall after its completion by the aforesaid four persons. It was recited in that document that the said cinema hall which was, partially constructed, together with the site should be put in possession of these four individuals and that they should spend Rs. 40,000/- for completing the construction of the cinema hall and for providing the furniture and equipment necessary for ru...
D. Subbaiah Vs. G. Suryanarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP636
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The question that calls for decision in this Second Appeal is as to the starting point of limitation under Article 132 of the Limitation Act.2. The facts culminating in this litigation may be briefly stated. The plaintiff's husband one Somaraju mortgaged five items of property tinder Ex. A-1 on 13th December 1924 to one Venkatalingam. Shortly thereafter, Somaraju died, leaving behind him plaintiff and his two minor sons. In order to discharge that mortgage. the plaintiff executed a sale deed of item 1 described in the schedule annexed to the plaint (Ex B-1 dated 28-9-1926) in favour of the 1st defendant. Out of this price, she received only Rs. 400/- leaving the balance with the vendee to be paid to the mortgagee.Some time later, items 2 and 3 were conveyed by her to one Venkatareddy, the father of defendants 2 and 3 under Ex. A-2 dated 7-5-27 for a total consideration of Rs. 2170/-. Out of this, she left Rs. 1500/- with the vendee with a direction that the lat...
Smt. Kotipalli Mahalakshmamma Vs. Kotipalli Ganeswara Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP54
Srinivasachari, J. 1. This appeal arises in execution proceedings. The appellant herein is the transferee-decree-holder. The relevant facts necessary for the purposes of this appeal may be stated. 2. A decree was passed by the Subordinate Judge in O. S. No. 106 of 1933 in a suit filed for partition of 1/4th share in the suit properties, for mesne profits and for accounts. The preliminary decree passed by the Subordinate Judge was taken in appeal and the High Court confirmed the decree in A. S. 111/1937. 3. An application for the appointment of a Commissioner (I. A. 269/1936) was filed to ettect a division of the properties. In 1937 the properties were divided and the plaintiff given his share in the immovable properties and possession also was given. 4. After all this was over, the decree-holder assigned his decree in favour of the appellant herein a final decree was passed on 8-1-1945 embodying the result of the partition and awarding a particular amount to the plaintiff as mesne prof...
G. Balakishtiah Vs. B. Ranga Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP112
Manohar Pershad, J.1. The plaintiff-appellant herein filed a suit for possession and mesne profits against the defendant-respondent alleging that on 6th Meher 1343 F, the owners of the suit land transferred the same in his favour through a registered sale deed and he has been in possession by leasing it on kaul to Ismail Sherif and alter his death to Ahmad Sherif and thereafter to his two sons Khaja Sherif and Maqdoom Sherif, who agreed orally to continue us lessees on the basis of the previous agreement. He further avers that later on the lessees in collusion with the defendant dispossessed him.The defendant (respondent) has denied all the allegations contained in the plaint, claimed ownership of the land and stated that he and his an-cestors had leased out the land in dispute to Gul Farosh (flower vendors) and according to the custom prevailing, if the owner of the land desired to evict the Gul Farosh, he had to pay money towards the right of owneiship and possession of the lease and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »