Andhra Pradesh Court June 1963 Judgments
Karumuru Venkata Ramanadham Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Hyderabad.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1963
Reported in: [1964]52ITR742(AP)
CHANDRA REDDY C.J. - The question to be answered by us in this reference i :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the surplus as estimated by the assessing authority on the sale of certain lands should be considered as capital accretion or as taxable profits earned in the course of the assessees money-lending business.'The reference relates to the assessment year 1956-57, the relevant accounting year being the Telugu year ended April 11, 1956. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family and carries on money-lending business. In satisfaction of the debts due to him, the assessee had been taking lands from his debtors. Some of these lands were sold by the assessee during the accounting year for Rs. 30,800. The Income-tax Officer treating these lands as stock-in-trade of the assessee, i.e., as part of the assets of the money-lending business, brought the profits made by the assessee out of this transaction to tax. He estimated the profits at Rs. 24,640 which amount on ...
Tag this Judgment!G. Venkata Ramaiah and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP416
ORDERBasi Reddy, J. 1. These are petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the notifications issued by the State Government under Sections 2 (i-a) 3, 4 and the first proviso to Section 5 of the Madras Commercial Crops Markets Act, 1933 (hereinafter referred to as 'this Act.') In each of Writ Petitions Nos. 273 and 274 of 1981, there is only one petitioner; in Writ Petition No. 486 of 1961 there are sixty eight petitioners; in Writ Petition No. 500 of 1961 there are two petitioners; in Writ Petition No. 32 of 1962, there is only one peti-tioner. All the petitioners except the two petitioners in W. P. No. 500 of 1961 claim to he commision agents carrying on business in chillies at various places in the district of Guntur and their business comprises in receiving chillies from agriculturists, storing them if necessary and selling them in the open market on behalf of the agriculturists to agents of buyers from outside the district and elsewhere. They...
Tag this Judgment!Satyanarayana Charyulu Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (Secretary, Educati ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-1963
Reported in: (1963)IILLJ481AP
ORDERGopalakrishnan Nair, J.1. The petitioner asks for a writ of certiorari under the following circumstances: He was a Telugu pandit in the employment of District Board, Nellore, till the year 1962 or so when he retired. He alleges that even before the year 1955 he had completed more than fifteen years of continuous service as a grade I pandit, and that therefore he applied to the district board on 22 September 1955 for a higher scale of pay which is known as the L.T. scale, in pursuance of G.O. Ms. No. 626. His request was granted and he was placed in the higher scale of pay. However, on 1 May 1959, the special officer of the district board served the impugned order on him reverting him to grade II and also asking him to reimburse to the Government the difference between grade I and the grade II salary, which he had overdrawn from 1 January 1918. This excessive drawal was mentioned in the order to have aggregated to Rs. 2,513.10. This came as a surprise to the petitioner as be had no...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of India Represented by Agent, State Bank of India, Eluru V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-18-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP378
1. The question in this second appeal is whether the Courts below were right in awarding interest by way of damages and costs. The appellant is the State-Bank of India. The respondent's father, one Venkata Rama Gopalarao, had a current account with the State Bank and on the date of his death an 19-7-1956, there was about a sum of Rs. 26,0007- and odd to his credit. After his death, the widow as guardian of the minor sons of Rama Gopalarao approached the Bank to invest three-fourths of the money in Government securities siren as the National Savings Certificates etc., and with respect to the one-fourth since Ramagopalarao left a daughter, she claimed the amount and ultimately obtained a succession certificate and withdrew this amount. In respect of the three-fourths of the amount, the Bank requested the guardian to produce a succession certificate but the guardian instead of doing so filed the suit for a declaration that the amount is part of joint family property and that no succession...
Tag this Judgment!Bavisetti Venkata Surya Rao Vs. Nandipati Muthayya
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-14-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP382
Basi Reddy, J. 1. This Second Appeal has been referred to a Bench by our learned brother, Seshachalapathi, J., on the ground that it raises an important question regarding tortious liability. 2. The defendant, who is the Village Munsif of Panduru village, is the appellant in this Second Appeal. The respondent, who is a well-to-do ryot of the same village, brought an action in tort against the defendant alleging acts of assault, intimidation and insult, and claiming an amount of Rs. 1000/- as damages. The Additional District Munsif, Kakinada, who tried the suit, held that the plaintiff was not entitled to any damages and dismissed the suit with costs. On appeal by the plaintiff, the Principal Subordinate Judge, Kakinada,, allowed the appeal in part, awarded Rs. 100/- as damages and allowed proportionate costs. Hence this Second Appeal by the defendant. 3. It is common ground that at the materialtime the plaintiff had cultivated some porambokeland and had been assessed to an encroachment...
Tag this Judgment!Nizam Sugar Factory Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Hyder ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-14-1963
Reported in: [1964]52ITR939(AP)
BASI REDDY J. - In this matter arising under the Hyderabad Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Nizam Sugar Factory Limited is the assessee. At its instance, this court, acting under section 26(3) of the Act, by an order dated February 25, 1959, directed the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Hyderabad, to state a case. In compliance with the requisition, the Commissioner has drawn up a statement of the case and referred the following two questions for determination by this cour :'(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, in adding the managing agency commission for computing the profits of the company, is justified in law(2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the income-tax authority was right in holding that the expenditure towards the construction of huts and camps was not a proper revenue deduction under section 7(2)(e) of the Hyderabad Agricultural Income...
Tag this Judgment!Methodist Boys' Multipurpose Higher Secondary School (by Principal and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-1963
Reported in: (1963)IILLJ496AP
Chandrasekhara Sastri, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the Director of Public Instruction, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (respondent 1), from enforcing his order in Proceedings R.C. No. 216-D2/61 dated 31 August 1961 and 2 January 1962 and from taking any action referred to in his order dated 2 April 1962. There are four other respondents, who ware subsequently imploded as party respondents as per the order dated 20 July 1962 in C.M.P. No. 5865 of 1862. They were teachers working in the Methodist Boys' Multipurpose Higher Secondary School, Hyderabad, on 31 May 1961 and who were not entertained as teachers in the school on and from 1 June 1961 by the board of management of the School which is the petitioner in this writ petition. The facts that led to the filing of the writ petition are as follows as disclosed in the affidavit of Ch. Luke, principal and co...
Tag this Judgment!Chebolu Satyanarayanamurthy Vs. Chebolu Ram Subbamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-11-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP105
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. This appeal, under Clause 15 of the Letters-Patent, is filed by the first defendant against the judgment of our learned brother, Seshachalapathi, J. with his leave.2. The appellant and the second respondent are the sons of the first respondent. The first respondent laid an action (O. S. No. 156 of 1955 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Bajah-mundry) against her two sons for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 100/- per mensem and other amounts for utensils, pilgrimages etc., and a provision for residence in the family house.3. Both the defendants resisted the suit. The plea taken by the appellant was that as he got divided from his father as far back as 1922, he was not liable to maintain his mother and that that was the obligation on his younger brother (second respondent), who was born after partition and lived in coparcenary with his father and succeeded by survivorship to his estate. The other facts pleaded by him are not quite relevant for the purpose of...
Tag this Judgment!Vuyyuru Sambrajyamma Alias Bhimavarapu Sambrajyamma Vs. Bhimavarapu Ve ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-11-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP93
Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. The question that is posed by this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is whether Section 4(1) of the Hindu (Bigamy Prevention and Divorce) Act, 1949 (VI of 1949), which declares a marriage in certain conditions void and punishable, could be availed of by one of the parties to such a marriage for getting that marriage declared to be null and void after this law has been repealed.2. It arises in the following circumstances. The first respondent, who was already married, took the appellant, his sister's daughter, as his second wife on 27-11-1950. Several years thereafter, i.e., on 25-4-1959, he filed a petition under Section 4(1) of the Madras Act VI of 1949 read with Section 29(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (22 of 1955) for a declartion that his second marriage was void and of no legal effect for the reason that he had his first wife living at the time of the second marriage.3. The petition was chiefly resisted on the objection that Section 4 was unavailable to the fi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›