Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP277
Umamaheswaram, J.1. The question that arises for consideration is as to whether an appeal lies under Clause 15. Letters Patent against the judgment of Jaganmohan Reddy, J. in C. M. P. No. 7781 of 1961. The appellant herein filed C. M. P. No. 7781 of 1961 to excuse the delay in filing an application under Order 47, Rule 1. Civil P. C. to review the judgment and decree of Subba Rao C. J. and Jaganmohan Reddy, J. in Appeal No. 182 of 1953. The learned Judge held that there were no sufficient reasons to excuse the delay in filing the review application and consequently dismissed the application. As against this judgment of Jaganmohan Reddy J., the Letters Patent Appeal is filed to this Court.2. Two objections were taken by the office as to the maintainability of the appeal. The first objection was that tinder the provisions of Order 47, Rule 7, Civil P. C. the order of the Court rejecting the review application is not appealable. The second objection was that as the order was passed by Jag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP198
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This revision petition raises a question relating to the interpretation of Order 21, Rule 89 Civil Procedure Code and it arises in the following circumstances.2. In execution of the decree made in S.C.S. No. 94 of 1956 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Gurazala, for Rs. 300/- two acres of land belonging to the petitioner was sold on 24-9-1957 for a sum of Rs. 68o/-. On 19-10-1957, the petitioner (Judgment-debtor) deposited a sum of Rs. 363/- towards compensation payable to the auction-purchaser under Clause (a), Order 21 Rule 89 Civil Procedure Code and for payment to the decree-holder the amount specified in the proclamation of sale for recovery of which the sale was ordered. The balance evidently represented the poundage payable by the judgment-debtor.3. An objection was taken by the decree-holder and the auction-purchaser that the deposit made by the judgment-debtor fell short by Rs. 6-91 nP. and consequently the sale could not be set aside. It must b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP263
Gopal Rao Ekbote, J.1. In all these writ petitions filed under Article 225 of the Constitution of India as a common question of vires regarding Rule 153-D of the Motor Vehicles Act as introduced by G. O. Ms. No. 2455, Home, (Transport-I) Dated 25-11-1950 is raised, they can be conveniently disposad of by one common judgment. We are not much concerned with the facts mentioned in each petition, as we are not called upon to decide anything keeping in view those facts. It will serve our purpose if we consider the arguments advanced regarding the question of vires raised before us. In order to appreciate the various contentions advanced it is necessary to see what the new Rule 153-D states. The salient features of Rule 153-D are:I. The rules are classified as: (a) short routes covering a distance of upto 30 miles. (b) medium routes covering a distance varying from 31 to 75 miles; and(c) long routes covering a distance varying from 76 to250 miles.Other things being equal, preference for shor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1964]51ITR742(AP)
VENKATESAM J. - The only question referred to this court for decision under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is, 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to the set-off of the loss of Rs. 12,300.' The relevant facts which appear from the agreed statement of the case drawn up by the Tribunal are as follows :The assessee is a firm carrying on business in turmeric. The assessment year is 1956-57, for which the corresponding previous year is the Diwali year ended November 14, 1955. One of the contentions before the department as well as before the Tribunal related to the disallowance of Rs. 22,257, which was the loss incurred in a business of speculation. The loss other than Rs. 12,300 was incurred in respect of contracts admittedly in the nature of teji-mandi contracts prohibited by section 19 of the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952, and was disallowed by the department on the grou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP344
ORDERGopal Rao Ekbote, J.1. These three revision petitions are filed by the defendant against whom the District Munsif Vijayavada, has decreed three suits for compensation for non-delivery of the property. 2. The necessary facts for the disposal of these revision petitions are that in all the three suits the plaintiffs stated to have sent a definite number of bags of dry chillies from Ithwari to Kondapalli. All these bags were consigned in one wagon, and as the entire consignment was not delivered to the plaintiffs, they obtained open delivery on 13th May, 1955. It was found that some bags were not delivered, while others were delivered in damaged condition. On the date when such open delivery was given both the parties assessed damages and signed a joint memo. The plaintiffs therefore filed these three suits for compensation of the property which was not delivered to them. 3. The defence of the Central Railway in all these three cases is that the wagon in which these bags containing c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP343
ORDERP. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The problem that poses itself before me in this civil revision petition is an interesting one and impinges on the effect of the death of the endorser of a promissory note on a suit instituted by the endorsee for collection on the basis of the promissory note.2. The defendant in S. C. No. 373 of 1958 on the file of the Additional Munsif-Magistrate Tenali, is the petitioner before me. He executed, a promissory note on 26-7-1956 in favour of one Konda Chellamma for Rs. 250/- payable with interest at nine per cent per annum. Chellamma endorsed this promissory note in favour of the respondent for collection. After the institution of the suit by the respondent, the endorser, Chellamma, passed away. Thereupon, the petitioner pleaded that the suit has abated by reason of the death of the endorser which has resulted in the termination of the authority of the plaintiff to continue the suit.We are here unconcerned with other defences as nothing turns upon them and as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1964AP56
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. In this appeal, the Indian Hume Pipe company Ltd. Bombay challenges the conclusions of our learned brother Seshachalapathi J., who dismissed Writ Petition No. 376 of 1959 for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the award dated 16-2-1959 of the Labour Court, Guntur.2-3. The appellant engages itself in the manufacture and sale of cement concrete articles like Hume Pipes and R.C.C. poles etc. and has a number of branches spread over India and Ceylon, one such being Located at Ramavarappadu near Vijayawada. By a notice dated 12-5-1958, all the workmen in the Ramavarappadu factory were individually notified that, with effect from 12-6-1958, they would be retrenched as the factory had no orders and also as sufficient stock of steel was not available. Pursuant to this notice, the workmen !n that factory numbering about 40 were retrenched with effect from 12-6-1958 and were paid retrenchment compensation. In this enquiry, that retrenchment is not in issue.4. Some l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP353
Satyanarayana Raju, J.1. By a policy of insurance, dated June 29, 1950, the plaintiff's brother, Viswanadham (hereinafter referred to as 'the assured'), insured his life for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with the Warden Assurance Company Limited, the 1st defendant (hereinafter referred to as the insurer). The policy was, what is generally known as, an endowment policy. Under the terms of the policy, in return for the payment of an annual premium of Rs. 292-8-0 on May 20th of every year, for 40 years, the insurer agreed to pay the assured's heirs the sum of Rs. 10,000/-if the death of the assured should take place before the expiration of the period, and the like sum to the assured himself if he should survive the period. There is also a special term in the policy which provided that in case the assured died in an accident, an additional sum equal to the sum assured would be paid. It is common ground that the assured nominated his wife, Anasuya, as the person to whom the money secured by the po...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP447
Umamaheswaram, J. 1. This is an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the judgment and decree of Sanjeeva Row Nayudu, J. parity reversing the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, of Vijayawada in O.S. No. 148 of 1954. The plaintiff is the appellant. He instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 5825/- on foot of a promissory note executed by the defendant in his favour on 30-7-1951. The plaintiff and the defendant have married-sisters. The plaintiff is a resident of Manikonda and the defendant is a resident of Avutapalli. The case of the defendant is that he made in all ten payments on different dates and that only a balance of Rs. 1973/- was due by him.The learned Subordinate Judge accepted the evidence of the plaintiff and rejected the evidence of the defendant's witnesses as to the several alleged payments. In the result, he decreed the suit as prayed for. On appeal to this Court, the learned Judge held thfct out of the ten payments, seven payments were untrue. Re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP433; 1963CriLJ494
Anantanarayana Ayyar, J.1. In P. S. C. No. 10 of 1961, there was an enquiry by the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Alur against the sole accused, B. Parameswarappa for an offence under Section 302 I. P. C. In that enquiry the prosecution examined two witnesses namely, Boya Arjunappa and Chinna Thimmappa of Molagavalli; those two persons denied ail knowledge of the occurrence and the commission of the offence. But, each of them had given a statement earlier under Section 164 Cr. P. C. namely, Ex. P. 1 by Arjunappa and Ex. P. 2 by Thimmappa before the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Adoni, to the effect that he had seen the commission of the offence by the accused A. P. P. I filed a petition before the J. S. C. M. Alur under Section 479A Crl. P. C. requesting the Court to order prosecution of the two witnesses for perjury in the final order disposing of the case. The learned Magistrate passed an order dated 16-1-1962 discharging the accused on the ground that there is no evidence aga...
Tag this Judgment!