Andhra Pradesh Court March 1960 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.
P.V. Jaya Rao Vs. Cantonment Board, Secunderabad (Dn.)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP113
Narasimham, J.1. This is a petition invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to quash an order of the Cantonment Board, Secunderabad, dated 25-7-1957, levying a composition fee of Rs. 1,000/- for certain unauthorised constructions carried out by the petitioner in his premises or in default to demolish and remove the said unauthorised construction.2. The facts relevant for this enquiry are as under; The petitioner Sri P. V. Jaya Bao is a pensioner of the erstwhile Hyderabad Government. He is the owner of a building and land appurtenant thereto, bearing Survey Nos. 47/6, 47/7 and 47/8 in the village of Busareddiguda, Baghat Ta-luq, Hyderabad District. He applied to the Cantonment Board under Section 179 of the Cantonments Act II of 1924 on 21-5-1954 for permission to build outhouses consisting of three rooms and a verandah and servant's quarters consisting of two rooms and a verandah, one to the south-east and the other to the north-west in th...
Mohd. Abdul Azeem Vs. Syed Miram
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP65
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The only question for consideration in this appeal is whether it is open to this Court to reopen the question whether an appeal should be admitted in forma pauperis when once leave was granted in that behalf. 2. The appellant filed an application for permission to file the appeal in forma pauperis and when the matter came before Vithal Rao Deshpande and Taki Bilgrami, JJ., of the erstwhile Hyderabad High Court, the learned Judges directed notice to be issued to the Government Pleader to enquire into whether the appellant was a pauper or not. On receipt of the report, it appears that the matter was heard and ultimately the learned Judges allowed the petition to file the appeal in forma pauperis and directed the office to take further action. Thereupon, the appeal was registered as a regular appeal and summons was served on the respondent on 30-3-1956. In response to the summons the respondent appeared and wanted to have the order granting leave to appeal in forma p...
Mocherla Venkataraya Sarma Vs. Y. Sivarama Prasad and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP250
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The Chairman and the Vice-Chairman of the Krishna Zila Parishad were called upon by an order of this court dated 29th December 1959 made at the instance of a member of Artamur Panchayat within the limits of Bantumilli Panchayat Samithi to show why an information in the nature of quo warranto should not be exhibited against them to show by what authority they were-holding these offices.2. The grounds of application were that the election of the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman was held before the constitution of the zilla Parishad and that the notice issued by the Collector of the District for holding the meeting for their election did not satisfy the requirements of Rule 4 of the Andhra Pradesh (Conduct of Election of President and Vice-President of Panchayat Samithis or Chairman of Zilla Parishad) Rules, 1959,3. A few facts material for the purpose of this enquiry need mention. The Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Samithis and Zilla Parishads Act, 1959 (hereinafter refe...
Public Prosecutor, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Kothakapu Etreddy Venkata Reddi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP105; 1961CriLJ356
Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. This criminal miscellaneous petition is presented by the Government of Andhra Pradesh under Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act and Section 561-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, for directing Shri R. V. Rama Rao, Ex-Public Prosecutor to withdraw his appearance for respondents 1 to 5 (A-1, A-6, A-7, A-9 and A 10) and also to refrain from appearing for any of the respondents 6 to 10) (A-2 to A-5 and A-8) on the ground that Shri Rama Rao was the Public Prosecutor up to the forenoon of 21-1-1960; that in his capacity as such filed a memo of appearance on behalf of the Government in Crl. Appeal No. 86/1959 filed by respondents 1 to 5(A-1, A-6, A-7, A-9 and A-10); that in the said capacity he also advised the Government to prefer appeals against the acquittal of respondents 6 to 10 herein, namely A-2 to A-5 and A-8; that the Government accepted his advice and asked him to prefer an appeal which he did (being Cr. Appeal No. 296/1959), and that both the appeals Cr. Ap...
Union of India (Uoi) (income-tax Officer, Eluru) Vs. Official Liquidat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-1960
Reported in: AIR1960AP555
Satyanarayana Raju, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a common order passed by the District Court, West Godavari in I. A. Nos. 52 and 53 of 1956 in O. P. No. 67; of 1954.2. The facts, which have given rise to these appeals, may be briefly stated :2a. One Garapati China Kanakayya obtained a compromise decree in O. S. No. 83 of 1952 against the Eluru Motor Transport Limited. The decree provided, inter alia, that the. Company should pay the decree amount on or before the 1st December, 1953 and that in the event of the amount not being paid before the due date, the decree-holder should recover the entire decree amount by sale of the 13 buses belonging to the Company.On the 17th April, 1953 the Managing Director of the Company executed a registered security bond in favour of the District Judge, at West Godavari whereunder the thirteen buses, register numbers whereof were mentioned in the bond, were furnished as security for the satisfaction of the decree. Under the security bond, it was a...
Chikkula Chendraiah Vs. Tata Seetarammaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP102
ORDERMunikanniah, J.1. This revision petition is filed against the order of the Munsif Magistrate, Khammameth, refusing to receive the written statement filed by defendant No. 5 as, according to the learned Munsif Magistrate, the right of that defendant to file the written statement has been forfeited on 2-3-1957.2. A few facts need be mentioned for formulating the question that arises for determination in this revision petition. The petitioner is the 5th defendant in O. S. No. 74/1 of 1954 on the file of the Munsif Magistrate, Khammameth. This defendant was not originally made party to the suit. The 'B' diary contains under date 1-8-1956 that the petition of Tata Seetha Ramiah dated 17-11-1955 for impleading him has already been granted and it was ordered that the case be put up on 31-8-1958. The next note in the 'B' diary is of 3-1-1957. It is noted thereunder that the advocate of defendant has objected, as the copies of the suit documents have not been given and the pleader for the ...
Pamulapati Ankineedu and Kota Venkatasubbiah Rice Mill Co. Vs. the Add ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1960
Reported in: [1961]43ITR522(AP)
CHANDRA REDDY C.J. - This is an appeal against the judgment of our learned brother Satyanarayana Raju J. dismissing a petition for the issue of a writ of prohibition restraining the Additional Income-tax Officer Bapatla, from proceeding with the enquiry in respect of levy of penal interest against the appellant firm.The appellant, a firm of merchants carrying on business at Bapatla, started a new business during the assessment year 1950-51. For the assessment year 1951-52, the firm was assessed and directed to pay a tax of Rs. 33,625-5-0, and its application for registration under section 26A was refused. The appellant preferred an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against this order and it was dismissed. The matter was carried by way of appeal to the Appellate Tribunal which has since been disposed of and we are not here concerned with its result.The assessment in respect of the year 1950-51 was completed on November 30, 1954, and the assessment with regard to the subsequ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad Vs. J. Govinda Rao and Sons.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1960
Reported in: [1961]41ITR186(AP)
CHANDRA REDDY, C. J. - At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad, this court required the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the following question of law decision of this court, namely :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was justified in directing the Income-tax Officer to restore the status of the registered firm to the assessee for the year 1945-46 and to renew the registration to the firm for the year 1946-47 and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to receive the application filed under rule 2 (c) of the Indian Income-tax Rules for the year 1947-48 and dispose of it according to law.'In compliance with the direction of this court, the Tribunal submitted a statement of the case.The facts giving rise to the reference may be briefly set out. The assesses, who are dealers in hardware goods at Hindupur in Anantapur District, were originally assessed for the assessment year 1945-46 on a turnover of Rs. 24,668 under se...
Kalyanam Narasayya Vs. Kalyanam Seetaramma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-02-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP60
Chandha Reddy, C.J.1. This is an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of our learned brother, Manoher Pershad, J. in C. M. P. 354 of 1953.2. The appellant sought dissolution of his marriage with the respondent under Section 5(b) of the Madras Hindu (Bigamy Prevention and Divorce) Act, (Act VI of 1949) in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Tenali.3. A few facts material for the purpose of this enquiry may be set out. The appellant was married to the respondent in or about the year 1944 and they lived together for some time amicably. Later on, he found the respondent misconducting herself and he chastised her on one or two occasions. It is alleged that having fallen into bad ways, the respondent did not like to continue to live with her husband and one day when he was away from the house, she bolted away to her parental home taking with her all the jewels and also some cash, On returning home he learnt that she had gone to her parents' house.Thereupon, he wrote...
Y. Vasudevarao and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-01-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP229
Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. These two service writs under Article 226 of the Constitution are by a number of Judicial Officers for the infringement of their right of seniority as now fixed by the Government by its G. O. No. 564 dated 7-6-1954 and for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent, Government of Andhra Pradesh, to secure to the petitioners their rank of seniority and service as fixed by an earlier Notification dated 16-12-1949. 2. Writ Petition No. 1241/1958 is by four petitioners viz., Y. Vasudeva Rao, K. Venkatarat-nam, Ch. Srirama Rao and K. Sri Krishna. On a further petition -- C. M. P. No. 11051/1958 petitioners 5 to 7 were added viz., N. Srihari Rao, P. Seshagiri Rao and Mohd. Khader Khan. Similarly, Y. Srikrishnamurty, K. H. Bhushana Rao, and B. Venkataramana were added as respondents 2 to 4 on 30-1-1960 inasmuch as their rights, if any, were likely to be affected if the remedy sought was secured to the petitioners. 3. W. P. No. 1396/1958 is by one P. Anjane...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›