Andhra Pradesh Court June 1962 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.
Mohammad Dalil Khan Vs. State of Hyderabad Now Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-1962
Reported in: AIR1963AP216
Manohar Pershad, J.1. This appeal and cross-objections arise out of O. S. No. 1 of 1958, a suit by the plaintiff Mohd. Dalil Khan Bozai, appellant in the appeal, for recovery of O. S. Rs. 22,845-10-0 equivalent to I.G. Rs. 19,581-12-3 against the Government in respect of sums alleged to be due under four contracts which he executed for the Government.The facts giving rise to the present action are: Mohd. Dalil Khan Bozai, the appellant herein, took four contracts from the Government. The first contract related to the annual maintenance of Vikarabad-Bijapur Metal Road for 1930-51 chargeable to the normal annual maintenance grant. The second contract relates to the maintenance of Vikarabad-Bijapur Metal Road for 1950-51 chargeable to 55 per cent extra grant. The third contract relates to the laying of cement concrete in the road of 3 miles from Langar House Junction to Ibrahim Bagh Military Barracks Dust proofing Osmansagar Road,1357 F. The last contract relates to resurfacing Hyderabad-...
The Public Prosecutor, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Thota Chennaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-1962
Reported in: AIR1963AP289; 1963CriLJ7
Basi Reddy, J.1. This application has been filed by the Public Prosecutor under Section 561-fl of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the expunction of certain remarks from the judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, Hyderabad Sessions Division, at Secunderabad, in Sessions Case No. 4 of 1952, which has coma up to this Court as Referred Trial No. 8 of 1962, in which v/e have just delivered judgment. The remarks sought to be expunged are to be found in paragraphs 18, 15 and 33 of the learned Judge's judgment. The observations in paragraph 18 relate to Sri Nizam Yar Khan, a Deputy Collector who was working in December, 1961, in Hyderabad City as a Land Acquisition Officer for the Heavy Electrical Project, and who figured as Prosecution Witness No. 42 in Sessions Case No. 4 of 1962, The observations in paragraph 33 of the judgment relate to Sri N. Ramachandran, the Deputy Superintendent of Ponce, C.I.D., Crime Branch, Hyderabad, who had conducted 'ha investigation in the murder case and ...
Seth Pamandas Sugharam (Died) by Hardevi and ors. Vs. T.S. Manikyam Pi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1962
Reported in: AIR1963AP28
Umamaheswaram, J.1. In Sugnaram v. Nagappa, : AIR1960AP59 (FB) it has been held at p. 860 (of ILR Andh Pra) ; (at p. 64 of AIR) that if a defendant has not taken steps to have an award filed and gone through the formalities enjoined by the specific provisions of the Arbitration Act, it is not open to him to set up the award as a bar to an action that may be brought against him. Following the above decision, we hold that the learned Subordinate Judge of Kurnool erred in dismissing the suit on the basis of the award which has not been filed into-Court and in respect of which a decree had not been passed. The decision of the Supreme Court in Kashinathasa v. Narasingasa, : [1961]3SCR792 has no application to the facts of the case. The learned Judges did not express any final opinion as to whether the view taken by the Madras High Court in Suryanarayana Reddy v, Ven-kata Reddy, AIR 1948 Madras 436 and Raja-manickam Pillai v. Swaminatha Pillai, : AIR1952Mad24 or the view taken by the Full Be...
Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Company of India Limited Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1962
Reported in: [1963]14STC13(AP)
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The question at issue in both these writ petitions filed to quash the orders of the Board of Revenue is whether the sales of petrol by the petitioner to the Government partake of the character of inter-State sales falling within the purview of Article 286(2) of the Constitution and they are immune from the Madras Sales of Motor Spirit Taxation Act, 1939.2. It is unnecessary to state the facts of the case having regard to the course we propose to adopt.3. The Commercial Tax Officer called upon the petitioner to show cause why the sales of petrol should not be assessed to sales tax for the years 1955-56 and 1956-57 on the transactions of sale effected between these two periods. The petitioner objected to this on the ground that the sales in question were inter-State sale transactions protected from taxation by Article 286(2) of the Constitution. The Commercial Tax Officer overruled this objection and assessed the petitioner to sales tax.4. Appeals were carried by...
Rai Sahib Ramdyal Ghansi Ram and Sons and ors. Vs. Ramnivas
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-26-1962
Reported in: AIR1963AP138
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The point posed by this revision petition is whether certain documents constitute acknowledgments within the purview of Section 19 of the Indian Limitation Act or acknowledgments attracted by Article 1 of Schedule 1 of the Hyderabad Stamp Act (IV of 1331-F.) as amended by Regulation XIV of 1359-F.2. The facts leading up to this litigation may be shortly stated. The respondent executed two promissory notes on 23-1-1949 and 10-2-1949 for Rs. 2,000/. and Rs. 3,000/- respectively in favour of the petitioner-firm. Subsequently, he signed in the account books of the petitioner under certain entries containing the account between the parties on four occasions viz., on 4-11-1951, 30-10-1952, 27-10-1954 and 3-10-1956. A suit was laid by the petitioner for recovery of a sum of Rs. 8,596-70 nP. in the Court of the First Additional Judge, City Civil Court. The four acknowledgments referred to above were relied upon by the petitioner-plaintiff as saving limitation.3. One of th...
K.N. Krishnaiah Setty and Sons Vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1962
Reported in: [1963]14STC1(AP)
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. It is the connotation of 'tobacco and all its products' occurring in Schedule V to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, as amended by the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1958 (III of 1958) that falls for determination in this writ petition.2. The petitioner-firm is a dealer in tobacco and crushed tobacco stalks. For the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59 the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Hindupur, issued notices to the petitioner to submit a return of the turnover in respect of the crushed tobacco stems and stalks for the purpose of subjecting them to sales tax.3. Thereupon, the petitioner approached this Court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and contending that crushed tobacco stalks are not exigible to tax, as that commodity is exempted under Schedule V of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. In support of this petition, it is urged by Sri Anantha Babu that the expression 'tobacco and ...
Chintalapati Ranga Naikulu and Another Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-22-1962
Reported in: [1963]48ITR968(AP)
CHANDRA REDDY C.J. - The following question of law is referred under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act for the opinion of this court, namely :'Whether the firm is entitled to registration under the Act even if the whole of its divisible profits are not divided among the partners ?'This reference relates to the assessment year 1956-57. The assessee is a firm of two partners each having an equal share, constituted under an instrument of partnership dated November 15, 1955. It applied for registration of the firm under section 26A of the Income-tax Act for the said assessment year but the department refused to grant registration on the following two grounds :'(1) The divisible profits of the firm were not wholly divided between the two partners and, therefore, the rules of registration were not fully complied with by the assessee in that respect; and(2) A portion of the profits carried to the charity account amount to distribution of profits among others than those who are partne...
A. Narayana Reddy Vs. Dr. J. Sarojini Devi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-22-1962
Reported in: AIR1963AP378
ORDERNarasimham, J.1. This is a revision preferred by the plaintiff who instituted a suit in the Court of the Small Causes at Hyderabad for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 850/- on the foot of a promissory note dated 13-3-1957 executed by the first respondent herein, Sarojini Devi. The second respondent was used as a surety, the said liability having been undertaken by writing on the promissory note itself. The executant, the first respondent, was ex parte. The second respondent denied the suit transaction and her liability as surety thereunder. A further objection was taken by the second respondent (D-2), who contested the suit, that there has not been an effectual cancellation of one of the adhesive stamps which the instrument bears, that for the said reason the instrument shall be deemed to be unstamped and, as such, inadmissible in evidence.2. The learned Judge disbelieved the case of the respondent (the contesting defendant) on merits but had upheld her contention that the suit pro-n...
Kondapally Vasudev Reddy Vs. Baireddy Venkata Reddy and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-1962
Reported in: AIR1963AP232
ORDERMunikanniah, J.1. This revision petition raises not only some interesting points but certain intricate question also. It seeks to revise the order of the District Munsif, Mahabubabad, which purported to decide one issue in each of the suits O. S. No. 33 of 1959 and O. S. No. 1 of 1960 on its file.2. Peculiarly an objection as to the maintainability of this Revision petition had been taken on behalf of the respondents herein towards the very end of the arguments. Ordinarily, such an objection would precede other arguments; but nevertheless, I will proceed to consider the objection so raised.3. Mr. Triambak Rao Deshmukh pointed out that since the findings of the lower Court in regard to an issue in each suit which could be said to have been treated as preliminary issues are attacked the proper course is to file appeals and not question them in any Revision petition. Undoubtedly, it is indisputable that a revision wilt not lie if there is provision for an appeal. Therefore, the first...
Akula Mabukhan Vs. Rajamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-1962
Reported in: AIR1963AP69
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The problem that calls for solution in this C. M. S. A. which has been referred to a Bench because of divergence of judicial opinion, is whether the continuant of an execution petition filed by the decree-holder himself, by his legal representatives is hit at by Section 214(1)(b) of the Indian Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925).2. The circumstances which have given rise to this appeal are these.One Venkatanarasinga Rao obtained a decree in O. S. No. 43 of 1955 against the appellant-judgment-debtor on the file of the District Munsif's Court. Kavali, and it was transferred to the District Munsif's Court, Goofy for execution. Shortly thereafter, the decree-holder died and the present respondents applied to come on record as his legal representatives and continue the proceedings and the petition was ordered. When execution was proceeding, an objection was taken by the judgment-debtor, the appellant, that it was not competent for the legal representatives of the decree-hol...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »