Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
Hafeezunnisa Begum and ors. Vs. Income-tax Officer, B-iii, B. Ward, Hy ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-06-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP342; [1964]54ITR643(AP)
Chandra Reddy, C.J.1. The constitutionality of Section 64 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1961 is questioned in these Writ Petitions.2. The orders of the Income-tax Officer including the income attributable to the shares of the minor children of the two petitioners (petitioner 1 in W. P. No. 356 of 1963 and W. P. No. 357 of 1963) in their income for purposes of assessment, are sought to be quashed in these writ petition on the ground that Section 64 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1961 (XLIII of 1961) is beyond the legislative power of the Indian Parliament.3. The facts culminating in this controversy are shortly these.One Hakim Moizuddin, who was the inventor of a receipe known as the Zinda Tilismat, died in February, 1954, leaving behind his two widows, sons, daughters and an aged mother as also his lucrative business. On his death, his business devolved on his heirs-at-law. On 4-5-1954, a deed of partnership was executed amongst the heirs, and the minor children of Moizuddin were admitt...
Taduri Gopala Krishna Rao and ors. Vs. Kodey Narayya (Died) Kode Ganga ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-06-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP528
ORDERGopal Rao Ekbote, J.1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed against an order of the Revenue Divi-sional Officer, Eluru, given on 24th September, 1958. Theaction which leads up to this petition was instituted by thepetitioner before the Special Deputy Tahsildar, Tanuku underSection 13 of the Andhra Tenancy Act. It was alleged interalia in the petition that the petitioner is the landlord andthe respondent is a tenant The respondent executed apermanent muchilika in favour of the petitioner on 12-4-1920after paying a nazarana of Rs. 540/-. According to theterms of the said muchilika the respondent was to pay th8petitioner a rent of Rs. 60 on 30th Palgunam every year.It was provided that if the tenant commits default in payingthe rent for four years, the lease is liable to be determined.As the respondent failed to pay the rent for four years, thelandlord determined the lease and filed an application underSection 13 for eviction. 2. The defence raised b...
N.P. Chengalraya Naidu Vs. G.N. Pattabhi Reddi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP164
Satyanarayana Raju, J.1. This is an appeal, under section 116A of the Representation of the People Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') from an order made by the Election Tribunal, Chittoor, dismissing an election petition filed by the appellant.2. In February 1962, general elections were held for the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly.The appellant and respondent were the contestants from the Vepanjeri constituency in the District of Chittoor. The poll was held in the various polling stations of the constituency on February 19, 1962. The total number of votes polled was 51,278. The respondent secured 25,131 votes and the appellant, 24,798. The invalid votes were 1,349. The Returning Officer declared the respondent to have been duly elected by a majority of 333 votes.3. Shortly thereafter, on April 6, 1962, the appellant presented a petition to the Election Commission at New Delhi, in which he alleged that the respondent had committed several corrupt practices, and claimed a dec...
The State of Andhra (Now Andhra Pradesh) Represented by the Collector, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-1963
Reported in: AIR1964AP450
Ekbote, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is preferred by the 1st defendant, the State of Andhra Pradesh, from a judgment of our learned brother, Sanjeeva Row Nayudu, J., given on I4th November, 1960, whereby he dismissed the appeal of the 1st defendant and allowed that of the plaintiffs decreeing their suit. Briefly stated the relevant facts are that the plaintiffs and defendants 3 to 18 are the member of Schedule castes, and that they were assigned the suit lands which are about Acs. 94-56 cents in extent situate in Doddanapudi by the Government in or about 1920 according to the plaintiffs. Defendants 3 to IS subsequently transferred the area of land which was allotted to them, to the plaintiffs. The usual pattas were granted relating to the assignments. The plaintiffs therefore claimed themselves to be in possession either as original grantees or pattadars or as transferees from the original grantees. The District Collector, West Godavari, Eluru, passed an order of resumption on 25th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›