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.
Karumanchi Varalakshmamma Vs. Karumanchi Veeraraghavamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-07-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP166
Seshachelapati, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit Instituted by the respondent for the recovery of possession of items 1 to 10 described in the plaint schedule and niaktha or rent of Rs. 28/- for the year 1949 from the 1st defendant. The items 1 to 9 of the plaint schedule are agricultural lands. Item 10 is a house with a vacant site. The case of the plaintiff is that these properties belonged to her husband one Guravayya, and on his death she inherited them. Subsequently she leased out items 1 to 9 under a registered Cowle dated 23-2-1935 to the husband of the 1st defendant. Ramachandrayya and marked as Ex. A-1.According to the terms of that lease Ram-chandrayya had to pay an annual rent of Rs. 19/-for 50 years for the lands comprised in items 1 to 9 of the plaint schedule. By a Rental agreement dated 20-2-1935 Ramchandrayya took on lease the house and the vacant site comprised in item 10 of the plaint schedule on a stipulation to pay Rs. 9/-rent per annum. The lessee, Ramc...
Padala Satyanarayana Murthy Vs. Padala Gangamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-07-1959
Reported in: AIR1959AP626
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The question to be answered in this case is whether Section 77 of the Indian Registration Act bars a suit on the basis of an unregistered will when the Sub-Registrar refused to admit it for registration, which order was confirmed on appeal by the District Registrar.2. The facts leading up to the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal lie in a narrow compass and could be stated in the following words. The appellant sought to sue in forma pauperis for recovery of the properties belonging to one Padala Paddireddi, who died on 6-8-1953, possessed of the same and leaving behind him his wife and two daughters and his younger brother, the plaintiff, averring that Paddireddi executed his last will and testament two days prior to his death bequeathing most of his properties to the plaintiff. The will was presented in the Sub-Registrar's Office at Kothapeta. On an objection taken by the widow and the daughters of Paddireddi, registration was refused on 19-3-1954. This order of refus...
Potti Swami and Brothers, a Firm of Merchants Carrying on Business at ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-07-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP605
Jaganmohan Reddy, J. 1. These two first appeals are directed against the judgment and decree of the Second Additional Subordinate Judge of Vijayavada dismissing the suits, O. S. Nos. 22/1949 and 107/1950, for recovery of Rs. 11,230 (in O. S. No 22/49) being the amount of principal and interest at 6 per cent per annum from 1-1-47 and for Rs. 5,464/- (in O. S. 107/50) being the principal amount with interest at 3 per cent per annum. Both these suits relate to the recovery of subscriptions paid to the Bezwada Hospital Association, registered under Act XXI of 1860, of which defendants 1 to 21 constitute the General Body, due to tie non-fulfilment of the objects of that Association, namely, the building of a hospital at Bezwada. In so far as O. S. 107/50 is concerned, the defendants are Rao Saheb D. Govindarajulu the Mad-dula Narayana Sarma who are defendants 3 and 4 in O. S. 22/1949.2. In O. S. 22/1949 the plaintiff alleged that defendants 1 to 5 who are the Bezwada Hospital Association re...
Johnalagadda Venkataraju Vs. Board of Revenue (Secretary, Board Revenu ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-07-1959
Reported in: (1960)IILLJ283AP
ORDERSatyanarayana Raju, J.1. This is a petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution, for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Government in G.O.Ms. No. 1495, dated 2 July 1955.2. The petitioner joined service in the year 1940 in Mallavaram estate as a clerk on a monthly salary of Rs. 25. He was promoted as a revenue inspector in 1942 on a salary of Rs. 35 per month. Consequent upon the subdivision of the Patavala estate, in 1947, one-eighth of that estate merged in the Mallavaram estate. On 4 August 1947 the petitioner was promoted as the tanedar for the whole of the estate. According to the petitioner, his pay as and from the date of his promotion as tanedar was raised from Rs. 35 to Rs. 60 per month. According to the averments contained in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent 2, the petitioner was no doubt receiving Ra. 60 per month, but he was paid part of the amount, i.e., Rs. 25 as allowance, known as tanedar's allowance, till 7 September ...
Kanayalal (Died) and ors. Vs. Official Receiver Appointed by the Dist. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-06-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP53
Manohar Pershad, J.1. The C. M. A. 110/3/55 and the cross appeal arise out of a petition filed by the appellant as creditor No. 15 for recovery of Rs. 1,405-6-0 due from the Official Receiver in respect of rent for his malgi claiming priority over other creditors. The application of the creditor No. 15 was partly allowed by the court below and partly rejected. It is against the rejection of his claim for the rents of the period prior to the date of adjudication that the creditor No. 15 has now come up in appeal. The Official Receiver has filed cross-appeal challenging the order of the court below holding that the creditor No. 15 will get priority over other creditors in respect of rents that accrued after the date of adjudication.2. The sole point that falls for determination in this appeal is whether the appellant is entitled to priority over other creditors. In order to appreciate this point it is necessary at this stage to consider the facts of the case. One Nathalal was occupying t...
Raja Rameswar Rao Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP42; [1960]40ITR576(AP)
Srinivasa Chari, J.1. This petition arises on a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Bombay Bench) under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act.2. The assessee is one Rameswar Rao, the Proprietor of the Samasthan of Wanaparti, one of the big Jagirs in the Hyderabad State. This Jagir as other jagirs was abolished after the coming into force of the Hyderabad (Abolition of Jagirs) Regulation, 1358 F., and the administration of the Jagir was transferred to the Government on and from a particular date fixed by the Military Governor. The Jagir was made over to the Government by the Jagirdar and after the administration came into the hands of the Government, payments were made to the erstwhile Jagirdar in accordance with the provisions mentioned in Sections 10 to 14 of the aforesaid Regulation. In this case the petitioner received the following sums on the particular dates shown as against them :25-1-1950 -- Rs. 49,285-12-010-4-1950 ... Es. 49,285-12-03-7-1050 ... Ra. 24.6...
Mamidi Lakshminarayana Vs. Akula Satyanarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP339
ORDERMunikanniah, J.1. This matter comes before the Court on reference by the Office. It arises in the following circumstances :2. C.R.P. 1884/58 has been filed by the plaintiff against the orders of the Courts of the subordinate Judge, Eluru, which directed the plaintiff to pay ad valorem court-fee on the entire value of the suit properties. The contention of the plaintiff that he is liable to pay court-fee on 3/4ths of the market value under section 21 of the Andhra Court Fees Act has been raised, but decided against by the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Eluru. That Court demanded payment of court-fee under Section 7 Clause (v) of Act VII of 1870.Against this order is the present revision application in which the office insisted upon the process being taken out for all the respondents. But the contention on behalf of the petitioner has been that as the matter in question in the revision petition relates to court-fee and concerns the Government and the plaintiff only, the defendants ...
Mohammed Ghouse Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP194
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This is a petition for leave to file an appeal to the Supreme Court of India against the order of this Court refusing to quash the dismissal of the petitioner. After an enquiry held by the High Court of Madras into several charges against the petitioner and on the recommendation of the High Court, the Government of Andhra Pradesh dismissed the petitioner, who was at the material time holding the post of a Subordinate Judge, as the charges were held to have been substantiated. To quash that order, the petitioner invoiced the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The main contention raised on behalf of the petitioner in the writ petition was that the High Court had no jurisdiction to hold the enquiry without its being initiated by the State Government. After referring to the relevant rules, namely, Rules. 11 and 17 framed under Art, 309 of the Constitution, we decided that it was quite competent for the High Court to enquire into the ch...
In Re: Mettu Pentayya and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-1959
Reported in: AIR1960AP545; 1960CriLJ1402
Basi Reddy, J.1. The case out of which these appeals arise, has had a long and chequered career. Two persons, father and son, by names Mettu Danayya and Rajeswar, were done to death on the night of the 14th, November, 1954, in the village of Venkatapur by a large number of Bhois of that village. After investigation, the Police laid a charge-sheet against 25 persons out of whom two persons, Kalchetti Danayya and Gaddam Muttayya, were shown as absconding. Three out of the 23 were discharged by the Committing Magistrate and the remaining 20 persons stood their trial before the Court of Session, Hyderabad District.The then learned Sessions Judge convicted 9 persons and acquitted the remaining 11. The convicted persons appealed to the erstwhile High Court of Hyderabad, while the State appealed against the acquittal of the 11 persons. The High Court ordered a retrial of the case on the ground of non-compliance with the provisions of Section 309 Cr. P. C. which as it stood then, dealt with th...
Addepally Sobhanadri, Thammana Gangadharam and Sons Vs. Board of Reven ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-1959
Reported in: [1959]10STC560(AP)
The Judgment of the Court was delivered byChandra Reddy, C.J.1. In this appeal, the validity of the order of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes passed in a revision petition against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes is challenged. It raises the question of the correctness of the assessment to sales tax of certain transactions amounting to Rs. 64,721-2-8 and relates to the assessment year 1953-54.2. The facts that are material for the appreciation of the questions arising in this appeal may be briefly stated. The Chittivalasa Mills manufacture jute goods and effect sales of their products through guaranteed brokers. The appellants, a firm of merchants at Rajah-mundry, are approved buyers of these goods from the mills. They bought several bales of jute bags on forward contracts at the rates and conditions contained in the form of contracts and paid some amount by way of advance. In their turn, they entered into agreements with third parties for the sale of these ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›