Andhra Pradesh Court April 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.
In Re: Siram Reddi Simhachalam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP253; 1960CriLJ561
Krishna Rao, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Srikakulam sentencing the appellant to rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 471 read with Section 465, Indian Penal Code and to rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 420 Indian Penal Code, the sentences being ordered to run concurrently. The conviction under Section 471, read with Section 465, Indian Penal Code, is based on the fact that the appellant used a forged transfer certificate (Ex. P. 3) to obtain admission into the Government Basic Training School at Parvatipur and produced it for the purpose before the Headmaster (P.W. 1) on 9-8-1951.The conviction under Section 420, Indian Penal Code is based on the consequential fact that ho drew stipends amounting to Rs. 330-10-0 during the period of Ms training in the Basic Training School from 9-8-1951 to 1953. These facts were established by the evidence at the trial and are not now disputed. The only ground urged in supp...
The Ongole Byragi Mutt, Ongole and ors. Vs. Inala Kannayya and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP98
Satyanarayana Raju, J.1. These cases were referred to the Full Bench because Umamaheswaram, J., before whom they originally came up for disposal, considered it necessary that the conflict between the two Division Bench decisions of the Madras High Court in Kanda Poonappa Naicken v. Venkata Sesha Iyar 50 Ind Cas 353 (2) : (AIR 1919 Mad 809 (1) ) and Seerangathuni v. Vaithilinga Mudaliar, 40 Mad LT 532: (AIR 1921 Mad 528) should be resolved by a Full Bench.2. The relevant facts are few and not in dispute. There is an institution at Ongole, known by the name of the Byragi Mutt. The Mutt owns extensive landed properties, Pursuant to the decree dt. 23-1-1952 passed by the Subordinate Judge's Court, Ongole, in O.S. No. 4 of 1951, the then trustees who were in management of the affairs of the institution, were removed from their office and three trustees were appointed, one of whom was designated the Managing Trustee. After obtaining possession of the lands belonging to the Mutt, the Managing...
Dasari Suryanarayana Vs. Dasari Venkata Subbaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-14-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP75
ORDERUmamaheswaram, J.1. The important question of law that arises for decision in this Civil Revision Petition is whether an order for consideration of several suits can be made in proper cases in the exercise of the court's inherent powers. The Court below held that in the interests of justice, it is necessary to try O. S. No. 109 of 1958 and O.S. No. 83 of 1058 on the file of the District Munsiffs Court. Repalle together.2. Mr. G. Venkatrama Sastry, the learned Advocate for the petitioner, has contended that under the provisions of Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, no order for consolidation of the suits can be made. This question was elaborately considered by a Bench decision of the Calcutta High Court in Kali Charan Dutt v. Surja Kumar Mondal, 17 Cal W.N. 526. The learned Judges followed the earlier decision of their Court and held as follows :'We are of opinion, therefore, that an order for consolidation can be made in a proper case in exercise of the inherent power of ...
Manepalli Venkatanarayana, Proprietor, Venkateswara Electrical Rice Mi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-14-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP171; [1959]10STC524(AP)
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. All these petitions raise a question relating to the validity of Rule 31 (5) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957. They bear on the assessment year 1954-55. The petitioners are proprietors of various rice mills situated in different districts of Andhra Pradesh. They deal in paddy, convert paddy into rice in their mills and sell the resultant rice. For the year 1954-55, they submitted returns showing a particular turnover and they were assessed to tax on those turnovers.On the basis of some experiments, carried on by the Department, the concerned Deputy Commissioners of Commercial Taxes issued notices to these petitioners in or about December 1957 calling upon them to show cause why they should not be assessed on the escaped turnover under Rule 31 (1) read with Rule 31 (5) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules. After filing objections before the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes raising contentions questioning the jurisdiction of tha...
Pamulapati Bhushayya Vs. Kommareddy Chinnapareddi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP39
ORDERJaganmohan Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal by the 2nd defendant against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Guntur, passed in favour of the plaintjff-1st respondent. 2nd respondent is the 1st defendant. Plaintiff-1st respondent had filed a suit on promissory note executed by the appellant and the 2nd respondent on the allegation that he and the appellant carried on tobacco business jointly in the year 1948 and in connection therewith, the appellant had to pay certain amount to him.As there were differences, the matter was referred to mediators and an amount of Rs. 8,000/-was settled as being due to the 1st respondent by the appellant, who along with the 2nd respondent agreed to and executed a promissory note on 24-6-1950 for that amount payable with interest at 9 per cent per annum from that date till the date of payment. As the defendants failed to pay in spite of repeated demands orally and by a registered notice Ex. A-5 dated 5-6-1951, 1st respondent filed the suit ...
Kumaram Kamesam Bhukta (Died) and ors. Vs. Kumaram Lakshminarasama and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP114
ORDERMunikanniah, J.1. In this revision petition, which is filed against an order to restore a suit, the question for determination is whether the restoration of the suit could he in respect of defendants who have been exonerated by the plaintiff.2. The plaintiff, who is the 2nd respondent herein filed a suit for specific performance, basing his claim on an agreement to sell obtained by him from defendants 1 to 4 or in the alternative for return of the price paid; Defendants 5 to 9 who claimed to be entitled to a paramount title, have also been impleaded. A decree has been passed and against it defendants 5 to 9 appealed. In that appeal, A. S. No. 80 of 1952 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Srikakulam an order remanding the case had been passed. When the suit came on for trial after remand, the plaintiff exonerated defendants 5 to 9.At the instance of the 1st defendant who remained ex parte this decree was again set aside and the suit was restored not only against defendants 1 to ...
Legisetti Srinivasulu Vs. Gondi Peda Kondappa
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP174
ORDERRanganadham Chetty, J.1. C. R. P. No. 894 of 1957: The question that arises in this case is in regard to the appropriation of a sum of Rs. 100/- paid towards the debt on 15-8-1955. The plaintiff-creditor wants the sum to be appropriated towards interest in the first instance. His case is that when the amount was remitted through one G. Survanarayana. the defendant, as the debtor, sent explicit instructions that it should be appropriated towards interest. That case was not believed by the trial Court, andthe sum of Rs. 100/- was therefore, appropriated by the lower Court towards the principal. Hence this Revision Petition by the creditor-plaintiff. 2. I am not interfering with the finding of fact that no specific instructions were issued bv the defendant-debtor for the appropriation of. the sum towards interest. Nevertheless the creditor has got a right to appropriate the amount under Section 60 of the Contract Act towards the interest if be chooses. That right subsists even up to ...
Palur Venkata Subba Reddy and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and anr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP500
ORDERKrishna Rao, J.1. This is a petition under Sections 435 and 439 Criminal Procedure Code for revision of an order made by the First Class Magistrate, Gudur under Section 145(6), Criminal Procedure Code declaring that the 2nd respondent is entitled to be in possession of the disputed land until evicted therefrom in due course of law and forbidding all disturbance of such possession by the petitioners until such eviction. The main ground taken in support of the revision is that the Magistrate's finding Under Section 145(4) in favour of the 2nd respondent is based on a one-sided review of the evidence and that the Magistrate has not perused at all or taken into con- sideration the affidavits put in on behalf of the petitioners. It is therefore urged that the order is grossly unjust and that the matter ought to be remanded for a proper disposal.2. The dispute relates to about 20 acres of wet land in Survey Nos. 32 to 38 of the village of Punjulurupadu shortriam. The eleven petitioners ...
Charku Sattiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP153; 1960CriLJ309
Basi Reddy, J.1. The appellant, Charku Sathiah, who figured as the 1st accused in the court below, was tried along with one Deverpalli Ramaiah, who figured as the 2nd accused, on a charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. which was framed in the following terms :'That you the said Cheruku Satliiah along with. Deverpalli Ramaiah on the 21st day of September 1957, at 5 P.M. with the common intention to do away with Deverpalli Malliah as there was longstanding land dispute between Deverpalli Ramaiah and Malliah, administered poison to Deverpalli Malliah mixed with sugar, saying that it is 'prasad', as a result Malliali died in the hospital at Ramannapet after 15 days, and that you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and within the cognizance of this Court.And I hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on the said charge.'2. A similar charge was framed against the 2nd accused. The learned Sessions Judge has acquitted t...
Jetti Varahalamma Vs. Jetti Ammathalli Naidu (Died) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP590
Srinivasachari, J. 1. The appellant herein is the widow of one Yeruku Naidu. She filed a suit in forma pauperis against her husband's undivided father and brothers for separate maintenance at the rate of Rs. 75/-P. M. and for separate residence. She also claimed past maintenance at the same rate. A claim of Rs. 200/- was also made for utensils etc. The defendants resisted the suit contending mainly that the plaintiff's right was only to sue for partition and separate possession of her husband's 1/4 share in the joint family property under the provisions of the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, Act XVIII of 1937, and that the claim for maintenance, therefore, was unsustainable. They further pleaded that they proposed to the plaintiff that she should take awav her 1/4 share but her father stated that it would be difficult for her to go and settle down in the village for supervising cultivation and under the circumstances it was desirable that her maintenance claim was settled and that...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »