Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP375
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The problem we are called upon to solve in these three revision petitions arising out of three suits brought by the respondents herein before the Deputy Collector, Amalapuram is whether Section 12 of the Madras Hereditary Village Offices Act (III of 1895) is hit by Article 16 of the Constitution.2 The facts leading to the present litigation may be shortly stated. The lauds which constitute the emoluments of blacksmith and carpenter service and which are the subject-matter of the three suits lie in the villages of Godilanka and Mogallamuri, East Godavari District. The inams situate in the first of the two villages were being enjoyed by one Pilladi Brahmalingam as the last male-holder, while those in Mogallamuri were enjoyed by Godi Viramma, the widow of Godi Veerareddi. One Pilladi Subbarayudu had a son and two daughters, Pilladi Brahmalingam and Sattemma and Viramma. Sattemma was married to Manepalli Ramanna and they had two sons, Subbarayudu and Buchanna; the pla...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1964CriLJ237
ORDERMunikannaiah, J.1. The Munsif Magistrate, Luxettipet, has found that in the Golla or Shepherd's community, divorce in, accordance with custom is prevalent and that the parties before him in Case No. 9/6/60 had been separated as the divorce had taken place between that husband and wife on 31-8-1959. He, however, considered that such a divorce had not had the stamp or approval or the decree of the Court Under Sections 10 and the of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 (hereinafter called 'the Act') and that even for. a valid divorce under custom, a decree of the District Court Under Section 14 of the Act is a necessity. In this view, the learned Munsif Magistrate decreed, that the wife is entitled to the payment of Rs. 20/.- per mensem as maintenance. He also felt that the decision in Meganatha v. Smt. Susheela (S) : AIR1957Mad423 supported the view that a customary divorce cannot be complete or rendered legal if no decree concerning it Under Section 14 of the Act is obtained. While consi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP415
ORDERChandrasekhara Sastry, J.1. The petitioners are the Union of India represented by the General Manager, Nortben Railway and represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway. The plaintiff-respondent is a firm of merchants and commission agents. The plaintiff filed the suit against the defendants for the recovery of Rs. 677-22 being the price of 19 bags of gram dall and freight. The plaintiff stated that 201 bags of gram dall were booked at Mansa, Punjab, to Eluru on the southern railway at the risk of the railway under invoice No. 5 on 30-9-1956. The goods reached Eluru on 22-10-1956. When the plaintiffs wanted to take delivery on 23-10-1956, it was found that 19 bags were badly damaged, and became unfit for human consumption. The plaintiff took delivery of the remaining-182 bags on that day and asked for open delivery of 19 bags which were damaged. As the Claims Inspector was not available, intimation was sent to him by the railway to go to Eluru to give open delivery and mean...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1964AP43
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The questions referred to this Court for its opinion under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act by the Board of Revenue (Chief Controlling Revenue Authority) are these:1. What is the correct classification of the two documents? 2. What is the correct stamp duty on each document 2. The facts, which have given rise to this controversy arising in this enquiry, are shortly these. Applicant No. 1 executed a deed of simple mortgage for Rs. 1,00,000 (one lakh) on 6th June 1958 in favour of the Andhra Cotton Company, Secunderabad, paying a stamp duty of Rs. 1,500/-, Two days thereafter, an agreement was executed by applicant No. 1 in favour of applicant No. 2 appointing the latter as his agent for managing the Ginning and Pressing Factory situated at Adoni, Kurnool District, engrossing this document on a stamp paper of Rs. 37-50 Np., under Article 6, Schedule 1-A of the Indian Stamp Act. When this document was presented for registration, as the Registration Department had a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP474
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This is a reference by the Board of Revenue, Andhra Pradesh, Chief (Controlling) Revenue Authority, under Section 55 of the Hyderabad Stamp Act, corresponding to Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, raising a point as to the chargeability of the proper stamp duty in respect of an instrument dated 10-11-1956 styled 'Deed of dissolution.'2. Since the nature of the document turns upon its contentions, it is useful to extract it here in extenso.'This deed of dissolution of partnership made this 10th (tenth) day of November 1956, between : 1. Mallikharjunappa Kalyanshetti, son of Sri Siddappa, aged about 53 years, Lingayat, residing at Secunderabad and (2) Siddaramappa Barhanpure, son of Sri Vishtalingappa, aged about 31 years, Lingayat, residing at Secunderabad. Whereas the abovesaid parties have been carrying on business as dealers in motor parts as partners at 50-A, Mahatma Gandhi Road, since 7-11-1953 under the name and style of Messrs. M. S. Kalyanshetti, Automo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1983AP225
Rama Rao, J.1. The appellants are defendants 1 to 3. The plaintiff filed a suit for partition and separate possession of 1/4th share of the properties the averments in the plaint are as follows: The plaintiff's father late syed Hussain Akbar Hussain was the sole and absolute owner of the suit premises. He died leaving the plaintiff and the defendants as heirs. Plaintiff and 2nd defendant are the sons through his first wife Bibi sabi. Defendants 1 and 4 are the son and daughter of second wife 3rd defendant. The plaintiff and defendants are in possession of hte property. The shares of the plaintiffs, 1st defendant and 2nd defendant are 1/4th share each and the defendants 3 and 4 1/8th share each.2. The defendants 1 to 3 filed a written statement stating as follows: defendants 1 to 3 are residing in a house No. 4-3-1975 which is made subject matter of partition by the plaintiff. On the death of the plaintiff's father, the 3rd defendant became entitled to dower amount of 85 and half tolas ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP459
ORDERSatyanarayana Raju, J.1.This revision petition raises the question of the effect of the repeal by a repealing enactment. The question has arisen in the following circumstances.2. The respondent herein instituted a suit in the Court of the III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for dissolution of her marriage with the petitioner on the ground of ill-treatment. While denying the averments made by the respondent, the petitioner pleaded that the Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. The question of jurisdiction was taken up as a preliminary issue. The learned trial Judge negatived the peptitioner's contention and directed the parties to proceed with the trial of the other issues raised in the suit. Against the finding on the preliminary issue, the petitioner has filed this revision petition.3. For a better appreciation of the question arising for determination, it is necessary to give the history of the material legislative provision. Under Section 5 of the Shariat Act,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP379
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. In this Writ Petition the Andhra Pradesh Urban Areas Surcharge on Property Tax Act (XIII of 1958) (hereinafter referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity) is challenged as being unconstitutional and ultra vires. This Act directs the Municipal Councils of Andhra Pradesh State to levy surcharge on property tax on certain buildings.2. The petitioner, a resident of Kurnopl town, owns forty seven buildings within that Municipality. He was paying yearly property tax of Rs. 4,130-12 Nps. On 18-4-1959 he received a notice of demand for payment of Rs. 413-01 Nps. as surcharge on the tax paid by him for the year 1958-59. The petitioner immediately filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution questioning the validity of this Act.3. The primary contention urged on behalf of the petitioner is that it is not within the competence of the State Legislature to make law empowering .he Municipality to levy a tax on the property tax payable under the provisions of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1964AP25; 1964CriLJ24
Munikanniah, J.1. This appeal is against the acquittal of the respondent by the learned Sessions Judge of Guntur of an offence under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (XXXVII of 1954). Against the respondent who is a owner of retail shop, it is alleged that he had in his possession red-gram dhall for sale and that it was misbranded. At about. 10-00 A.M. on 23-10-1959, the Food Inspector (P. W. 1) went to the shop of the respondent at Ongole and having, purchased three giddas of this commodity and paid therefor and obtained the receipt (Exhibit P-2), he sampled the same and sent one of the samples to the Public Analyst. After the receipt of the report of the Analyst (Exhibit P. 3), the Food Inspector caused the respondent to be prosecuted for an offence under Section 16(1) (ii) read with Section 7 of Act XXXVII of 1954.The accused raised several defences. He stated that his son-in-law was looking after the shop and he could not, therefore, be made liable. He put up the case that t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP337
Sharfuddin Ahmed, J.1. The question that falls for determination in this revision petition is whether a statement made by a witness in the court admitting a time-barred debt fulfils the requirements of Section 25(3) of the Contract Act. The relevant facts to appreciate the arguments may briefly be stated. The petitioner herein borrowed a sum of Rs. 200/-from the plaintiff-respondent and Executed a promissory note in his favour on 16-7-1951 agreeing to pay interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum. On 15-6-1954 he paid a sum of Rs. 5/- and made an endorsement on the pronote. There were no subsequent payments and the claim became time-barred. On 18-8-1958 he was examined as a witness in the case in which the respondent herein was the 1st defendant (O.S. No. 30 of 1958). During the course of cross-examination he stated as under:'I executed a pronote for Rs. 200/- in favour of the1st defendant and I am prepared to pay off the debteven now.'On that basis, the respondent issued notices an...
Tag this Judgment!