Andhra Pradesh Court March 1963 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.
Chandika Venkata Reddi and ors. Vs. Chandika Kondamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1963
Reported in: AIR1963AP484
Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. The question that is posed by this appeal directed against the judgment of our learned brother, Anantanarayana Ayyar, J., in S. A. No. 676 of 1957 under clause (15) of the Letters Patent, filed with his leave, is whether a surrender in favour of a remote reversioner is void or voidable at the instance of the nearest reversioner. 2. The facts of the ease, which are not in dispute, lie within a narrow compass and may be stated as follows: The Respondent, the widow of one Basavayya, executed a deed of surrender on 9-4-1949 in favour of her husband's paternal uncles, who are not the nearest rcversioners, the presumptive reversioner being her mother-in-law, in respect of all the properties left by her husband, i.e., Ac. 4-10 cents. Within a few days thereof, i.e., on 21-4-1949, the surrenderees (defendants 1 and 2) settled Acres 2 out of the properties upon the widow with absolute rights and put her in immediate possession thereof. 3. For reasons which are not apparen...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. G. Sanjeeva Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1963
Reported in: 1963CriLJ708
ORDERSharfuddin Ahmed, J.1. These two revision cases arise out of the orders of the Sessions judge, Adilabad under Section 494 Criminal Procedure Code on his refusal to accord permission to the proposed withdrawal by the Public Prosecutor pending before him. It appears that in the first case which forms the subject matter of Sessions Case No. 9 of 1961 in all 29 accused are involved while in the second case, the subject matter of SC No. 8 of 1961, 31 accused are facing trial. A perusal of the charge sheet and the committal order will indicate that the offence with which the accused were charged are of sufficiently grave nature viz., rioting armed with deadly weapons attempt to commit murder, dacoity, voluntarily causing hurt and grievous hurt etc., under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 324 and 395 I.P.C. In the other case, equally grave allegations are made. Both the offences are alleged to have been committed on the same date viz, 27-12-1959.2. Briefly, the allegations are that on the da...
Uppala Peda Venkataramanaiah Vs. First Additional Income-tax Officer, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-17-1963
Reported in: [1964]53ITR11(AP)
GOPALAKRISHNA NAIR J. - These five writ petitions arise out of certain proceedings under the Income-tax Act relating to five assessment years 1951-52 to 1955-56.A separate petition is filed in respect of the proceedings taken in regard to each of the five years. In respect of the year 1952-1953, the relief asked for is a writ of certiorari. In respect of the other four years, the petitioner has sought a writ of prohibition to forbid the Income-tax Officer at Visakhapatnam to continue the proceedings he has initiated. In respect of the year 1952-53 he has already made an order and the petitioner seeks to quash it as one made utterly without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the Income-tax Act.As the parties to these petitions are the same and as the petitions raise common question of law they have been heard together and can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment.The facts are not in dispute and lie within a brief compass.The petitioner is a partner of two differe...
Nagala Dinne Erranna Vs. Angadi Modappa and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-1963
Reported in: AIR1963AP457
ORDERSatyanaranyana Raju, J.1. This Revision Petition is directed against a finding of the Court of Dt. Munsif Adoni, on a preliminary issue in a suit instituted on the foot of a promissory note.2. The 1st respondent instituted a suit for recovery of certain sum of money on the foot of a promissory note. The present petitioner and his brother (the defendants in the action) pleaded inter alia that the suit promissory note, not having been properly stamped, was not admissible in evidence. There were other pleas taken by the defendants. But as this plea that the srit promissory note is not valid and is not enforceable in Jaw would, if held, in favour of the defendants render the trial of the other issues unnecessary, it was taken up as a preliminary issue. On a consideration of the various contentions raised before him, the Munsif held that the document, having been certified to be duly stamped by the Collector, is valid and found issue No. 2 in favour of the plaintiff.3. For a proper app...
Sri Surya Trading Firm and ors. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-1963
Reported in: [1963]14STC720(AP)
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The problem that is posed by this revision is whether an assessee falling under Section 8(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, is entitled to the benefit of the exemption granted under Notification No. 2328 dated 13th December, 1957, issued by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 9(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957.2. The question arises in the following circumstances. The assessee, a dealer in handloom cloth, submitted his return for the assessment year 1957-58 disclosing a turnover of Rs. 1,27,516-7-9 and claiming exemption from payment of tax in regard to the turnover for the period between 14th December, 1957 (when the abovementioned notification came into effect) and 31st March, 1958. The turnover involved in this period is a sum of Rs. 58,312-1-9. This turnover consists of inter State sales and consequently, the transactions are governed by the provisions of Section 8(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, ...
D.P. Narasa Reddy Vs. Ellisetti China Venkata Subbayya and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-14-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP71
Satyanarayana Raju, J. 1. This revision petition, arises out of a suit filed by the respondent, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 260/- towards damages for the loss of a consignment of beedies entrusted by him for transport from Proddatur to Tadipatri.2. The 1st defendant was impleaded in the suit as he was the owner of the public carrier and was liable to make good the loss occasioned to the plaintiff by the non-delivery of the goods entrusted to the 2nd defendant, who was at the material time, his driver.3. The facts which are material for the purpose of appreciating the points raised before me can be briefly stated. The plaintiff is the owner of a motor lorry and is a resident of Proddatur. The 1st defendant is also a resident o Proddatur and is the owner of the motor lorry A P D 625. The and defendant was in the employ of the first defendant, at the material time as his driver. Messrs. Syed Trading Company are the manufacturers of a brand of beedies, known as 'Gopuram Beedies', having t...
Public Prosecutor Vs. Sundaradara Rao (M.)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-14-1963
Reported in: (1963)IILLJ492AP
Sharfuddin Ahmed, J.1. The question in these two appeals is whether the provisions of Section 4(1)(a) of the Madras Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), are applicable to the respondent herein who is stated to be the manager of Sri Krishna Picture Palace, Guntur.2. Two cases were laid against the respondent herein by the Assistant Inspector of Labour, Guntur, with the allegation that when the establishment was inspected by him on 8 March 1961 at 8-50 p.m., he found that the respondent 'had failed to comply with the provisions of the Act and rules to the extent of Rules 16(9),18(4), 16(12) in 0. No. 688 of 1961 and Rule 16(11) read with Rule 16B, in C. No. 689 of 1961. These cases were tried by the Special First-class Magistrate and presiding officer, labour court, Guntur. The learned Magistrate held that as the provisions of Section 4(1)(a) of the Act exempt the petitioner from the operation of the Act, he was not liable to punishment for the contravention o...
Bheema Reddi Jeedikanti Ram Reddi Vs. Salla Venkat Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1963
Reported in: AIR1963AP489
Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. In this appeal presented against the judgment of our learned brother, Srinivasachari J., under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the short point for determination is whether Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act could be invoked by a usufructuary mortgagee.2. The suit brought by the respondent on the foot of a registered sale deed for possession of the property, which was usufructuarily mortgaged to the appellant under an unregistered document, was resisted by the appellant on the basis of his possession obtained in part performance of the mortgage.3. While the trial court decreed the suit overruling the defence, the lower appellate court on appeal by the aggrieved defendant dismissed the suit upholding the plea of the defendant. In second appeal brought by the plaintiff against the judgment of the District Judge our learned brother,Srinivasachari J., reversed the lower appellate Court's judgment in the view that Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act i...
Guduthur Thimmappa and Son Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1963
Reported in: [1964]15STC299(AP)
P. Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This revision case is directed againt the order of the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing an appeal brought by the petitioner against the decision of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Anantapur.2. The assessee, Messrs Guduthur Thimmappa & Son, is a firm of merchants carrying on business in cotton and cotton seeds at Adoni, Anantapur District. He was provisionally assessed for the year 1958-59 on a turnover of Rs. 1,10,415. At the end of the year, he submitted a return disclosing a gross turnover of Rs. 21,39,260 and a net turnover of Rs. 1,31,712.3. The Commercial Tax Officer allowed certain deductions and rejected others. He allowed exemption on a turnover of Rs. 3,61,663 in respect of sales to one Jasraj Amarchand, a dealer outside the State subject to verification of the claim and payment of tax by him (Amarchand).4. Dissatisfied with the determination, the assessee carried an appeal to the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax...
The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Varre Pothuraju and Ghanta Simhachalam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1963
Reported in: [1964]15STC222(AP)
Chandra Reddy, C.J.T.R.C. No. 7 of 1962.1. This revision filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh against the majority decision of the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal involves a question relating to the revisional jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.2. Before we embark upon a discussion of the problem that presents itself here, we will have to state a few material facts. The respondent is a dealer in bullion and jewellery at Rajahmundry. This firm was provisionally assessed for the year 1955-56 on a turnover of Rs. 1,22,605-8-3 by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Rajahmundry II. They filed a return for 1955-56 showing a gross and net turnover of Rs. 1,98,460-3-0. As the assessing authority was not satisfied that the books of account were correctly maintained and as it found that a turnover totalling Rs. 21,107-8-0 was suppressed in the course of two and a half months, estimated the turnover to the best of his judgment at Rs. 2,40,675-3-0.3. The Deputy ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »