Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
immedisetti Ram Krishnaiah and Sons Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-1960
Reported in: [1961]12STC212(AP)
ORDERJaganmohan Reddy, J. 1. In this C.M.P. the assessee has requested for the correction of an error apparent on the face of the record under Rule 18 of the rules made under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the rules) and for directing the Sales Tax Authorities to revise the assessment on that basis.2. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Anakapalli, by his order dated 31st March, 1952, had given certain reliefs to the assessee in the following turnovers claimed by him.1. Transfer and adjustment entries Rs. 2,357 1 52. Sales effected outside the State Rs. 1,20,920 2 03. Expenses incurred for loading andunloading etc. Rs. 13,575 1 94. On a turnover of Rs. 4,22,037-4-11turnover of Rs. 1,41,269-8-6 wasdisallowed and the rest allowed. Rs. 2,80,767 12 5 3. The total reliefs thus allowed amounted to Rs. 4,17,620-1-7 but at the end of the order, the Commercial Tax Officer only allowed Rs. 2,83,124-13-0 and has failed to give the assessee relief to the extent of Rs. 1,...
In Re: Bhupalem Venkata Subbaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-1960
Reported in: [1960]11STC850(AP)
ORDERAnantanarayana Ayyar, J.1. The three petitioners have filed this petition praying for revision of the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Cuddapah, in Criminal Appeal No. 119 of 1959 dated 20th July, 1959. They were the three accused in C.C. No. 328 of 1957 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Cuddapah. The learned Magistrate convicted and sentenced them as follows :-(1) Section 147, Indian Penal Code,, against A-1 to A-3.Sentence :-Each of A-1 and A-3 to pay a fine of Rs. 200 and. In default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.A-3 to pay a fine of Rs. 50 in default to suffer simple imprisonment for fifteen days.(2) Section 353, Indian Penal Code, against A-1 to A-3. Sentence :-Each of A-1 to A-3 to suffer one month rigorous imprisonment.2. The accused filed Criminal Appeal No. 119 of 1959 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah. The latter confirmed the convictions and sentences in toto and dismissed the appeal. Hence, this revision.3. The prosecution st...
In Re: Satyanarayana
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-25-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP213
ORDERAnantanarayana Ayyar, J.1. This revision has been filed by Guggilla Satyanarayana, the sole accused in S. C. No. 28 of 1958. He was charged before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Warangal with offences under Sections 489-B and 489-C, I. P. C. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of both the offences and sentenced him to three years' rigorous imprisonment on each count. The accused filed C, A. No. 233 of 1958 before the Sessions Judge, Warangal. The latter set aside the conviction and sentence under Section 489-B. I. P. C. but confirmed the conviction and sentence under Section 489-C. I. P. C. The petitioner feels-aggrieved with the conviction and sentence which have thereby been confirmed and has, therefore, preferred this revision petition.2. The prosecution case, supported by six witnesses, was to the following effect. Ramakka (P. W. 4) complained to P. Ws. 2 and 3 who were workers in a mill at Warangal, that the accused owed her a gold maim and had not re...
Chavali Mahalakshamma Vs. Badeneedi Machamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-25-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP263
Srinivasachari, J.1. This second appeal has been placed before the Bench, because the learned Judge who initially heard the second appeal was of the opinion that the question that arises for determination in the case was one, which, having regard to the importance, should be decided by a Bench. 2. The brief facts which have led up to the second appeal are that one Ankamma, who was possessed of considerable properties, died without leaving any male issue. Mahalakshamma is his daughter by his first wife Ayyamma. Basavapurnamma is his daughter by his second wife Machamma. Machamma and Basavapurnamma gifted away the suit properly consisting of one acre to 'Yadava Pradhamic Patasala Sangham', the second defendant in the case, by a deed of gift dated 10-4-1947. According to the donors, the gift was made for the spiritual benefit of the late Ankamma. The plaintiff, the daughter by the first wife of Ankamma, claiming to be the reversioner to the estate questioned the gift as being invalid and ...
Jamnalal Ramlal Kimtee and anr. Vs. Konda Lakshman Bapuji and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP259; [1961]31CompCas315(AP)
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. This appeal is against the order of our learned brother, Satyanarayana Raju, J. dismissing Application No. 206 of 1959, filed under Section 546(3) of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, by two of the shareholders of the Hyderabad Investment Syndicate Ltd. (in Voluntary liquidation), to direct the liquidator, the first respondent, to forfeit all the amounts paid by the auction-purchaser, the second respondent, and to resell all the assets and liabilities of the company by public auction. 2. It arises in the following circumstances. The-share capital of the Hyderabad Investment Syndicate Ltd. was covered by 50,000 shares of Rs. 50/-each. As the affairs of the company were not quite satisfactory at the 15th general Body meeting, the share holders passed a special resolution that the company should go into voluntary liquidation and appointed the first respondent, the liquidator. He was empowered to exercise the powers mentioned in Clauses (i) to (iv) of Sub-section (2...
Nenu Varahalu Vs. Nene Sithamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP272
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The point that falls to be considered by the Full Bench is whether the separate property of a widow, which is productive should be taken into account in assessing the quantum of, maintenance to be paid to her.2. The facts necessitating this reference lie in a short compass and are not in dispute. An action was laid by the respondent in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Eluru, against her adopted son, the defendant for recovery of maintenance, past andfuture, from 1-4-1940 at the rate of 80 bags per year and for provision for residence and pilgrimage at Rs. 500/- each,3. The defence to the suit was that the plaintiff was not entitled to any past maintenance or for any provision for pilgrimages and that future maintenance should be filed only at 12 hags a year as she owned properties yielding large income.4. The trial court granted a decree awarding past maintenance at the rate of 15 bags a year and future maintenance at the rate of 35 bags per year. The defend...
Walashan Prince Nawab Moazzam Jah Bahadur Vs. the Expenditure Tax Offi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP374; [1961]43ITR239(AP)
ORDERBasi Reddy, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging the validity of a notice dated 23-9-1958 issued by the respondent who is the Expenditure-tax Officer, Income-tax-cum-Wealth-tax Circle No. II, Hyderabad, under Section 13 (2) of the Expenditure-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and seeking an appropriate writ, more particularly a writ in the nature of prohibition, to forbid the respondent from taking any further steps under the Act. The petitioner denies his liability to be assessed under the Act and questions the jurisdiction of the respondent to proceed against him under the provisions of the Act.2. Expenditure-tax is a novel piece of taxation unknown to the taxing system of any other country and was introduced in our country by Act XXIX of 1957 which was enacted by Parliament on the 17th September, 1957 and came into force on the 1st April, 1958. The object of the measure is threefold : firstly, to augment public revenues; se...
Adoni Cotton Mills, Ltd. (by N. Vembu, Director) Vs. State of Andhra a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1960
Reported in: (1961)ILLJ27AP
ORDERBasi Reddi, J.1. In this writ petition, the director and managing agent of the Adoni Cotton Mills, Ltd., Adoni, challenges the correctness of the award made by the industrial tribunal, Visakhapatnam, in Petition No. 3 of 1954 which was filed under Section 33A of the industrial Disputes Act. This complaint under Section 33A of the Act was filed by Nachamma, the respondent 2 herein, and was an offshoot of the main industrial dispute which formed the subject-matter of industrial Dispute No. 12 of 1954 before the same industrial tribunal which concerned the dismissal of four workmen of Adoni Cotton Mills, Ltd., Adoni. The complaint of Nachamma was that during the pendency of the main dispute before the industrial tribunal, the management of the mills had dismissed her on 20 July 1954 without any justifiable cause and without the express permission of the tribunal as required by Section 33 of the Act.2. Section 33A enacts that where an employer contravenes the provisions of Section 33 ...
Saride Pullamma Vs. Saridi Madhuram (Died) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-18-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP385
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The controversy- in this second appeal revolves round Order 38, Rules 6 and 8 read with Order 21, Rule 63 C. P. C., the question raised here being whether a suit is competent against an order upholding the objection of a claimant that the property in dispute belongs to her and not to the judgment-debtor.2. The facts giving rise to this second appeal lie in a short compass and are not in dispute. The plaintiff in O. S. No. 257 of 1953, which has given rise to this appeal, filed O. S. No. 470 of 1952 against four persons on the foot of a promissory note executed by the first defendant therein, defendants 2 and 3 being his sons and defendant 4 being his sister, who is the 1st respondent in the second appeal.3. The defence on behalf of the fourth defendant in O. S. No. 470 of 1952 was that she was not in any way liable as she was unconcerned with that debt.4. Pending the suit, the plaintiff sought attachment of the property in disnute, under Order 38, Rule 5 C. P. C. ...
Chirala Buchi Reddi Vs. Satti Savitramma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-17-1960
Reported in: AIR1961AP305
Jaganmohan Reddy, J. 1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the judgment of our learned brother Sanjeeva Row Nayudu, J. raises the question whether the decree-holder is bound to proceed against the properties given as charge in respect of the decree amount first, before enforcing the personal liability under the decree against the judgment-debtor and whether any different conditions apply to a compromise decree. 2. The respondent, Savitramma, filed a suit O. S. No. 42 of 1948 for partition of the properties or in the alternative for maintenance, against 18 defendants which ultimately ended in a compromise decree under I.A. No. 1240 of 1951 on 30-8-1951. Under this decree, the respondent was to be paid Rs. 7,000/- by the 1st and 3rd defendants. Satti Subbarayal Reddy and Chirla Butchireddi, in full settlement of all her claims. In pursuance of this agreement, a sum of Rs. 3,000/- was paid at the time of the compromise and for the balance of Rs. 4,000/- the responde...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »