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.
R. Hanumanthappa Vs. the Special Officer, Dist. Board, Anantapur and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP342; (1959)IILLJ561AP
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. Three charges were framed against the appellant, who was a teacher employed in one of the schools under the management of the District Board, Anantapur. They are :1. That contrary to regulation 17 of the Conduct Regulations prescribed for Madras Local Authorities, Officers and servants, he was having connections with the periodical publication 'Upa-dhyaya' without obtaining the previous permission of the President, District Board, Anantapur; 2. That the petitioner subscribed a written article under the caption 'Letters' in January 1953 to the said periodical without the previous permission of the President, District Board, Anantapur, as required under regulations 18 and 19 of the regulations cited above and that he had criticised the administrative functions of the President and further discussed irrelevant facts and thus proved him-eelf a defiant and insubordinate servant of the local body in the capacity of a teacher; and 3. That he was acting as Secretary t...
Peyyeti Jagannadha Rao and anr. Vs. Pamarti Venkateswara Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP49
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. In these Civil revision petitions, a preliminary objection is raised as to whether an order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer in an appeal against the order of the Tahsildar under Section 16 of the Andhra Tenancy, Act (XVIII of 1956) is liable to be revised under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure,2. It is necessary for us to state the facts that have given rise to these revisions having regard to the nature of the present enquiry. The point that calls for determination depends upon whether the Tahsildar and the Revenue Divisional Officer adjudicating disputes under this Act constitute 'Civil Courts' subordinate to the High Court within the purview of Section 115 Civil Procedure Code.3. Since the problem has to be tackled with reference to Section 16 of the Andhra Tenancy Act, 1956, it is useful to read it here :'16 (1) Any dispute arising under this Act between a landlord and a cultivating tenant, including any question relating to the determinatio...
Manikonda Venkata Narasimham (Died) and anr. Vs. the Commissioner of I ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP92; [1960]39ITR575(AP)
Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. The following questions have been referred to us by the Income Tax Tribunal at Bombay, in compliance with our directions under Section 66 (2) of the Indian Income Tax Act (hereinafter called the Act).(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings under Section 34 of the Act have been validly initiated. (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, there was any material for the Appellate Tribunal to hold that the amount of Rs. 5,000/- for 1944-45, Rs. 11,000/- for 1940-47 and Rs. 10,000/-for 1947-48 represented the secret profits of the assessee from undisclosed sources. (3) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, there was any material for the Appellate Tribunal to hold that the credit of Rs. 3,263/- for 1944-45. Rs. 4,712/- for 1945-46 and Rs. 4,664/-for 1946-47 in the Andhra Bank in the account of Prafulla Chandra Sudha Khaddar Bandar represented the secret profits of the assessee. The assessee carries on busine...
N. Veerabrahmam Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by Its Secreta ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP572; 1959CriLJ1280
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The subject-matter of both the petitions is the order of the Government of Andhra Pradesh passed under Section 99A of the Criminal Procedure Code in G. O. Ms. No. 501 Home (General-C) dated 23nd March, 1958.2. The petitioner is the author of a book called 'Bible Bandaram', which means the Treasure of the Bible'. He claims to have dealt with the Bible from a scientific and rationalistic point of view. Being of opinion that it contains matter, which falls within the purview of Section 99-A, Criminal Procedure Code, the State Government declared that all copies of the aforesaid book, wherever found, should be forfeited to the Government. Pursuant to this, the books are said to have been confiscated by the officers concerned.These two petitions are filed in this Court challenging the validity of that order. Crl. M. P. No. 888 of 1958 is preferred under Section 99-B Criminal Procedure Code, while the Writ Petition raises the question of the constitutional validity of s...
Kondapalli Virraju Vs. General Manager Representing the Union of India ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP594
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This Civil Revision pension raises a question relating to the interpretation of Sections 77 and 80 of the Indian Railways Act. 1890. It arises out of a suit instituted (or recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,415/-by way of damages for the loss caused by the delas in transit of goods from Farukabad to Rajahmundry,2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated. The petitioner is a merchant at Rajahmuiidry dealing in vegetables. He purchased some potatoes at Farukabad. They were consigned at Farukabad to Rajahmuiidry under railway receipt dated 25-1-1554. The wagon reached Rajahmundry after a considerable delay and the goods delivered to the petitioner on 19-2-1954. When the wagon was opened, it was found that the potatoes were considerably damaged. The railway officers estimated the damage caused to the petitioner at 37 per cent of the cost. A week later, the petitioner laid a claim for Rs. 1,415/- as damages from the Southern Railway.As this demand was not complied with,...
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad Vs. Rayalaseema Oil Mills, T ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP23
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The question referred for the opinion of this Court is:'Whether on the facts and, in the circumstances of the case, the initiation of penalty proceedings and the penalty orders passed against the assessee, a dissolved firm for the assessment years 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50 were illegal and bad in law.'2. This reference relates to penalties imposed upon the assessee under Section 28(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the assessment years 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50. The assessee was a firm called Messrs. Rayalaseema Oil Mills, Tadpatri, which was engaged in the manufacture and sale of ground-nut oil. During the relevant accounting years, the assessee firm consisting of five partners was in existence but it was dissolved on 31-12-1949. The assessment for the three years was completed after that date. Having come to his notice during those proceedings that the assessee had concealed part of the income, the Income-tax Off...
Narayanam Narasimhacharyulu and ors. Vs. Pasupuleti Sambaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP131
Sanjeeva Row Nayudu, J. 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Subordinate Judge, Tenali in A. S. No. 95 of 1954 reversing the judgment and order of the District Munsif, Tenali, refusing to implead the present appellants as parties on an application made under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. At the outset, a preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the appellants viz. that the first appeal in the Subordinate Judge's Court, Tenali will not lie as any order made under Order I Rule 10, Civil P. C. is not appealable under Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure. He therefore contended that the first appeal itself was not competent and the learned Subordinate Judge had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter and reverse the finding and order of the learned District Munsif of Tenali. 3. On the question, if the lower appellate court had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, whether this Court has jurisdict...
Mohd. SultanuddIn Vs. Mohd. Dastagir and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP210
Manohar Pershad, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the 2nd defendant against whom and the 1st defendant (2nd respondent herein) a suit was filed for the recovery of Rs. 937/- O. S. The plaint allegation was that the 2nd respondent had borrowed a sum of Rs. 1500A from him in cash agreeing to repay the same together with a sum of Rs. 500/- on account of profits. According to the plaintiff; the 2nd respondent executed a mortgage deed in his favour for Rs. 2000/-, (Rs. 1500/- being the amount advanced and Rs. 500/- being the profits) and the appellant stood surety for him after executing a bond on 28th Amardad 1355F (3-7-1946) i.e. on the date of the execution of the mortgage bond undertaking the liability to pay the sum of Rs. 2000/-.The plaintiff avers that a sum of Rs. 1100/-has been paid towards this mortgage bond and the balance, according to him, was Rs. 900/-. Including the registration charges for the mortgage bond, the plaintiff claimed Rs. 937/- as stated earlier. The 2nd respo...
Govula Ramakistiah Vs. Yerram Yellappa
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP653
Manohau Pershad, J.1. On the basis of a sircath said to have been executed by the appellant herein for the monies borrowed by him from time to time, the plaintiff has filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 18,785-10-10 together with costs and future interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum, alleging that in respect of mutual dealings between him and the defendant (appellant) accounts were made up and there was a settlement on 20-7-1953 of the said mutual dealings and the defendant was found due to the plaintiff in a sum of Rs. 18,001, According to the plaintiff the 'defendant had agreed to pay the said sum within one month from the said date and executed a sireath in his favour. The plaintiff alleges that in spite of notice to pay the amount, the defendant has failed to pay it. The plaintiff therefore claims Rs. 18,001 towards principal and Rs. 774/- towards interest and Rs. 10-10-0 towards notice and registration charges; in all Rs. 18,785-10-10. The appellant has denied the execution o...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad Vs. Rayalaseema Oil Mills.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1959
Reported in: [1959]37ITR208(AP)
CHANDRA REDDY, C.J. - The question referred for the opinion of this court is :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the initiation of penalty proceedings and the penalty orders passed against the assessee, a dissolved firm, for the assessment years 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50 were illegal and bad in law ?'This reference relates to penalties imposed upon the assessee under section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the assessment year 1947-48, 1948-49 and 1949-50. The assessee was a firm called Messrs, Rayalaseema Oil Mills, Tadpatri, which was engaged in the manufacture and sale of ground-nut oil. During the relevant accounting years, the assessee firm consisting of five partners was in existence but it was dissolved on December 31, 1949. The assessment for the three years was completed after that date. Having come to his notice during those proceedings that the assessee had concealed part of the income, the Income-tax Officer...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »