Andhra Pradesh Court February 1961 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Public Prosecutor Vs. Chitrala Venkataswamy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ641
Basi Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal by the State Government against the acquittal of the respondent of an offence under Section 16 lead with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 The accusation against the respondent was that on 28.5.1959 he hid sold adulterated ghee which had been kept in his retail shop at Door No. 1/187 in Kurnool and was, therefore, liable to be punished under the Act.2. The plea of the respondent was one denial and he merely said 'I did not commit the offence'.3. The learned Magistrate who tried the case acquitted the respondent on the sole ground that there had been a 'flagrant violation' of the provisions of Section 10 of the Act inasmuch as the Sanitary Inspector (P.W. 1) when he brought the ghee from the respondent for the purpose of sending it for analysis, did not call upon two persons to he present and witness the proceeding.4. It is contended on behalf of the State that the learned Magistrate has fallen into a grave error in holding tha...
Nandigam Ramarao and ors. Vs. Burugupalli Srikrishnamurthi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1961
Reported in: AIR1962AP226
Chandrasekhara Sastry, J.(1) A. S. Nos. 65, 66 and 67 of 1957 are filed against the judgments and decrees in O. S. No. 72/53, O. S. No. 22/55 and 51/55 respectively on the file of the District Court, 'Eluru; C. M. A. No. 50/57 is filed against the order of the District Court. Eluru in I. A. No. 873/56 in I. P. No. 8/55 on its file.(2) The appellants are the same in all the appeals.The three suits and the application were tried together and the lower court gave a common judgment in all the four cases. The plaintiffs and the defendants 2 and 3 in the three suits are the same. The 1st defendant each suit is a creditor of the 2nd defendant and obtained a decree against the 2nd defendant for recovery of certain sums of money. The second defendant was adludicated as an insolvent in I.A. No. 873/ 56 is the official Receiver and the 2nd defendant in each of the three suits is the 1st respondent in it.The plaintiffs in the three suits are the respondents 2to 5 in I.A. 873/ 53. O. S. 72/53 is th...
Cherukuri Pirchiah, Advocate and Municipal Commissioner, Gudivada Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1961
Reported in: AIR1961AP465
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The order of the Chancellor of the Andhra University setting aside the election of the petitioner to the senate of that university is called in question in this petition. 2. In January 1960, the District Collector, Kri-shna, conducted the election of one member to the senate from the local bodies' constituency of that district, as requested by the university. In that election the petitioner secured 426 votes as against 424 polled by the third respondent. Consequently the petitioner was declared elected to the senate and the result of the election was Intimated to the university. It was notified in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette. The unsuccessful candidate preferred an appeal to the Chancellor of the university against the declaration of the result of the election complaining that some of the votes cast in his favour were improperly rejected by the Returning Officer. The Chancellor, being of the opinion that the grounds of invalidation of the votes were Improper, set a...
Dundoo Balakrishnamurthy and ors. Vs. Municipal Commissioner, Secunder ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-1961
Reported in: AIR1961AP489
ORDERSeshachalapati, J.1. This is a petition under Article 228 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash conditions Nos. (ii), (iii) and (vi) in Sanction No. 61/E of 1959-60 dated 13-5-1959 issued by the Commissioner of the Secunderabad Municipal Corporation.2. The petitioner and three of his brothers intending to erect a building in a site, in which, it is stated they have leasehold rights, on the Rastrapati Road, Secunderabad, gave notice to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Secunderabad under Section 428 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1956. The necessary site plan, the drawings of the proposed structure and other connected papers were duly submitted to the Commissioner along with an application for sanction to build within the meaning of Section 433. By an order dated 13-5-1959 the Commissioner of the Corporation in exercise of his power under Section 438 gave sanction for the construction of the building subject to cert...
Masireddi Suryanarayana Vs. Akula Anasuyamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1961
Reported in: AIR1963AP298
Umamaheswaram, J.1. The 4th defendant is the appellant, the suit was instituted for administration and far taking of accounts of the movable and immovable properties and assets of late Kasireddi Somanna, the father of the plaintiff and the 1st defendant. The 2nd defendant is the husband of the 1st defendant, and the 3rd defendant is a tenant of some of the properties involved in the suit. The 4th defendant is the brother of late Somanna and the 5th defendant is the maternal grand father of both the plaintiff and the 1st defendant. The main question that arises for consideration in the appeal is whether in a suit for administration of the estate of late Somanna, the 4th defendant, who claims title to items 5 and 7 (1) of A Schedule and item 3 of B Schedule by reason of a family settlement with the plaintiff and the 1st defendant, is a proper party to the suit and whether the Court below was justified in granting a decree for recovery of possession of those items.2. The plaintiff stated ...
Chitoory Venkataraju Vs. M. Venkatarajamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-10-1961
Reported in: AIR1963AP189
Ramachandra Rao, J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of our learned brother Sanjivarow Nayudu, J. under Clause. 15 of the Letters Patent in A. A. O. No. 179 of 1956. The facts leading upto the appeal are shortly as fallows :2. The appellant in this Letters Patent appeal is the holder of two promissory notes in his favour dated 7-12-33 and 8-2-34 for Rs. 2700/- and 2000/- respectively from the first judgment-debtor Mutha Saryarayudu. The interest was stipulated at Rs. 1-4-6% p. m. compound with quarterly rests and Rs. 1-6-6% p. m. compound with quarterly rests, respectively. On 25-7-39, the first judgment-debtor for himself and as guardian of his minor sons executed an agreement (Ex. A-2) in favour of the appellant, whereunder he undertook to create a mortgage over certain properties for the amount due under the two promissory notes. On 27-542, the' appellant filed the suit O. S. No. 37 of 1942 on the file of the Sub Court, Kakinada for the recovery of a sum of Rs....
In Re: Kanchamreddi Chinna Ranga Reddi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ318
Basi Reddy, J.1. On the evening of the 28th April, 1959 at about 7 P.M. whilst one Narayans Reddy (P.W. 1) was seated on the 'plal1 outside his house in Jutur village, a bomb was hurled at him and as a result of the explosion, although he escaped death, he was seriously wounded in the leg and disabled for life. In connection with' this incident, the two, appellants (who will be referred to as A-l and A-2 respectively) were tried, convicted and sentenced by the Sessions Judge or Anantapur as under: A-l was convicted Under Section 307 J.P.C. and Under Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years under each count. A-2 was convicted Under Section 307 read with Section 109 IPC and Under Section 3 read with Section 6 of the Explosive Substances Act and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years under each count. The sentences of both the appellants were ordered to run concurrently.(Here His Lordship narrated the fact...
Hyderabad Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. State of Andhra P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-1961
Reported in: AIR1963AP332
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The validity of Rule 36 of the Spirituous and Medicine Preparations Rules 1345 F. framed under the Hyderabad Abkari Act No. 1 of 1316 F. is impugned in these petitions.2. The petitioners manufactured medicines containing, inter alia, alcohol, opium and other narcotic drugs. Tney have been carrying on this business for some years. In ihe year 1955, the Parliament passed the Medicinal and Toilet Preparation (Excise Duties) Act (Act XVI of 1955) (hereinafter refered to as the Act) to provide for the levy and collection of duties of excise on medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol, opium, Indian hemp and ether narcotic drugs. This Act came into force in the State of Andhra Pradesh an 1st April 1957. Before this date, the petitioners ware given a pharmaceutical laboratory licence under the provisions of the Hyderabad Abkari Act. Subsequent to the Act, the petitioners were granted licence under the provisions thereof for manufacturing marines with contents...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›