Andhra Pradesh Court February 1963 Judgments
Vemula Seshaiah and Gongadi Ramappa Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1963
Reported in: [1963]14STC730(AP)
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This revision petition is filed by a dealer in groundnuts residing at Kallur of Anantapur District against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal confirming that of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, who affirmed the assessment made by the Gommercial Tax Officer, Anantapur.2. The petition relates to the assessment year 1957-58. The petitioner is a registered manufacturer of groundnut oil at Kallur within the jurisdiction of the Commercial Tax Officer, Anantapur. For the relevant year, he returned a gross turnover of Rs. 17,84,615-9-9 and a net turnover of Rs. 5,15,436-5-9, which represents the sale of oil extracted by him from the groundnuts purchased by him earlier and in regard to which he paid the purchase tax. It is in regard to the sale of oil that he claimed rebate.3. The assessing authority felt that this turnover was not exigible to tax either under the Madras General Sales Tax Act or the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act by reason o...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India, Railway Administration, Madras and ors. Vs. Eastern Ma ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP172
Venkatesam, J. 1. These three appeals arise out of three suits disposed of by a common judgment by the District Judge, of West Godavari at Eluru, in O.S. Nos. 48 and 36 of 1957 and O.S. No. 17 of 1958, respectively. These suits arose out of claims against the South-Eastern Railway, Calcutta, in O. S. No. 36 or 1957, and the Southern Railways. Madras, in the other two cases, claiming compensation for loss of goods in a fire accident, which took place in the railway goods-shed at Eluru.2. The relevant fact? in A. S. 47 of 1950 may be stated thus:The plaintiff Eastern Match Company, Tirumangalam, in Madurai District, delivered at Tirumangalam Railway Station, within the Southern Railway Administration, on 11-10-1956 two consignments of safety matches consisting of 56bundles for being forwarded to Eluru Railway Station on the same railway, and obtained from the railway authorities two Railway Receipts, Nos. G/283748, Invoice No. 1. Goods Forwarding Note No. 21, and G/283749, Invoice No. 2,...
Tag this Judgment!Vanga Seetharamamma Vs. Chitta Sambasiva Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP400; 1964CriLJ264
Kumarayya, J. 1. This revision petition, which is on reference before us, raises a short point as to the constitutional validity of Section 20 of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956.2. The revision petitioner took a house on rent from the respondent in Guntur Municipal area. She is said to have taken to a life of prostitute there and to have been since running a brothel in that house. This became a source of nuisance to the respondent and a menace to the healthy, moral atmosphere of the general public of the locality. On a petition filed by the respondent, the Additional Munsif-Magistrate, Guntur started proceedings under Section 20 of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act. 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). After due enquiry into the truth of the information received and after giving the petitioner herein an opportunity of adducing evidence he reached the conclusion that the petitioner is a prostitute and that it was necessary in...
Tag this Judgment!Amajala Sathiraju Vs. Gunda Subbayya and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP28
Venkatesam, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kakinada, in A. S. No. 102 of of 1960 on his file. That was an appeal against the order of the Principal Disrict Munsif, Kakinada, in I, A. No. 29 of 1955 in O. S. No. 295 of 1948, which was filed under Order XX, Rule 12, C. P. C. for ascertainment of the mesne profits. The District Munsif dismissed the petition on the ground that the second petitioner, Amajala Bojayya and the respondent Amajala Sathiraju (Judgment-debtor) are both brothers and legal representatives of the deceased decree-holder, Amajala Sathemma, that the interest of the decree-holder merged in both of them and the second petitioner having agreed not to press the petition, dismissed it as not maintainable.2. On appeal by Gunda Subbayya the transferee D.H. against the order of the District Munsif, the lower appellate Court remanded I. A. No. 29 of 1955 with a direction that the trial Court will implead the appellant,...
Tag this Judgment!Alluri Seshadri Reddi Vs. Devisetti Subrahmanyam and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1963
Reported in: AIR1963AP423
ORDERGopal Rao Ekbote, J.1. This revision petition arises out of E.A. No. 896 of 1959 filed by the auction-purchaser for the refund of 1/4th amount which he had deposited and for the payment of solatium which the judgment-debtor deposited under Order 21, Rule 89. This application was resisted both by the decree-holder and judgment-debtor on the ground that the auction-purchaser has not complied with Rule 85 of Order 21 and that therefore he is not entitled to the solatium amount.2. The learned District Munsif, Nellore, rejected the petition as far as the solatium amount is concerned, but allowed the auction-purchaser to withdraw the amount which he had deposited through a separate cheque petition. It is this view of the District Munsif which is questioned by the auction-purchaser before me in this revision petition.3. It is true that the auction purchaser has not deposited the full amount of purchase money payable and the general stamp for certificate under Rule 94 or any other amount ...
Tag this Judgment!Pakanti Sudarshan Reddy and ors. Vs. District Collector, Warangal and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP421
Ekbote, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 not to give effect to the election held on 26-4-1961 in respect of the Municipality of Warangal.2. The material facts lie within a narrow compass and are for the most part uncontroversial. TheGovernment issued a Notification on 11th March, 1981 under Section 17 of the Hyderabad District Municipalities Act, 18 of 1956, hereinafter called the Act, calling upon all the constituencies of the City Municipality, Warangal, to elect members before 27th April, 1961. The District Collector, Warangal, in pursuance of thesaid Notification under Section 20 of the Act, appointed various dates for nomination etc., according to which the last date for making nominations was fixed as 20th March, 1981 and 26th April, 1961 was fixed asthe date of poll. Accordingly, the elections were held on 26th April, 1961 under the supervision of the 2nd respondent, w...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of Hyderabad Vs. Joint Family of Mukundas Raja Bhagwandas a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP236
KUMARAYYA, J.1.The questions referred to this Full Bench for opinion are --1. Whether, on a true construction of Section 25 (1) of the Act, it has application to suits, appeals and applications for execution and proceedings other than revisional in respect of debts not existing on or before the notified date under Section 11 of the Act pending in any civil or revenue Court involving questions set out in that Section?2. Whether in execution proceedings relating to decrees obtained in suit filed after the notified date, the Court could go behind the decrees passed and trace the history of the transactions which resulted in the liability under the decree?3. If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether Section 25 (1) of the Act has to be struck down as violating Articles 14 and 19(1)(f) of the Constitution?The Act mentioned in question No. 1 is the Hyderabad Jagirdars Debt Settlement Act (XII of 1952).2. The above questions have arisen in a civil revision petition preferr...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: the Chief Executive Officer, Andhra Pradesh, State Road Transpo ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1963
Reported in: AIR1963AP491; 1963CriLJ601
Narsimham, J. 1. This is a revision presented by the Chief Executive Officer, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Hyderabad against his conviction for an offence under Section 123(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act (Act IV of 1939) for causing or allowing Bus No. APZ 917 belonging to the Corporation to run without a road permit from Hyderabad to Adilabad, and sentence of Rs. 100/- fine, or in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two weeks.2. The facts are not in controversy. On 30-6-1961 the Delux Bus APZ 917 was found running from Hyderabad to Adilabad without a road permit. The Bus driver and the Chief Executive Officer were prosecuted before the Munsif Magistrate of Boath for an offence under Section 123(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Bus driver, who was accused No. 1 in the case pleaded guilty. He was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 20/-. The Chief Executive Officer, accused No. 2 in the case, was also convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-...
Tag this Judgment!G. K. Padmaraju Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1963
Reported in: [1964]51ITR412(AP)
CHANDRA REDDY C.J. - The two questions on which the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, was directed to state a case for the opinion of this court under section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act were formulated in the following terms :'(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case there is any material on which the Tribunal could find that a sum of Rs. 21,000 in the name of Kurma Rao is a fictitious credit and represented the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources and(2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the proceedings initiated under section 34 of the Income-tax Act have been legally and validly initiated ?'The reference relates to the assessment year 1947-48, the corresponding accounting period being the financial year ended with March 31, 1947. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family carrying on business in wholesale grains and pulses. For the relevant assessment year, the assessee was assessed on a total income of Rs. 2,28,658 of ...
Tag this Judgment!A. Ramachandra Rao Vs. A. Venkata Lakshminarayana Sastry
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP31
Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. This revision petition has been referred to us by our learned brother Chandrasekhara Sastry, J., having regard to the question of general importance arising under the Andhra Tenancy Act. The petitioner is a cultivating tenant and the respondent is the landlord owning ac. 7-39 cents of land in Polavaram, and was in possession of the same and cultivated it for the year 1957-58 in respect of which year he paid to the respondent a rent of Rs. 220/- under Ex. B-1 dated 12-3-1958. For the year 1958-59 the petitioner executed a kadapa, Ex. A-1 dated 12-3-58 by and under which the rent was fixed at Rs. 240/- which was payable on or before 9-3-1959. The petitioner, however, did not pay the amount as stipulated on 9-3-1959. He appears to have sent Rs. 220/- only by money order on 6-4-1959 which amount, it is admitted, was received by the respondent on 15-4-1959.Under Section 13 Clause (a) of the Andhra Tenancy Act, 1956 (Act No. XVIII of 1956), hereinafter to be referred t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »