Andhra Pradesh Court October 1964 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.
Motors and General Stores (Private) Ltd., Bobbili Vs. Commissioner of ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP342
Jaganmohan Reddy, J. (1) The income tax appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad , has stated a case as directed by this court under section 66(2) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, in I. T. C. M. P. No. 5478 of 1961, on the following questions, namely : (1) Whether the transaction dated 19-9-1956 amounts to a sale within the purview of the second proviso to section 10(2) (vii) of the Indian Income tax Act Alternatively: Whether the consideration for the sale is not the market value of the shares as on the date of the transaction, namely Rs. 95/- per share, but the face value of the shares. (2) The assessment with respect to which the reference has been made is for the year 1956-57 relating to the accounting period of 1955-56. The facts as set out by the Tribunal in the statement of the case is that the assessee is a private limited company, a cinema house from which it was deriving income by exhibiting films. In a meeting of the Board of Directors held on 9-9-1955, it was resolved that the Ma...
Dondapati John Vs. Vaddi Subrahmani and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-29-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP260
Chandra Reddy, C.J.(1) This is an appeal from the judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Amalapuram dismissing the suit brought by the appellant in forma pauperis for the recovery of Rs. 27,409 - 50 nP.(2) the material facts of the case lie in a narrow compass and may be briefly stated. The 1st defendant executed a promissory note for Rs. 21,000/- on 7-1-1953. He presented a petition under section 10 of the Provincial Insolvency Act in the District Court, East Godavari on 17-7-1954, That was returned to him for presentation to the proper Court which is the Subordinate Judge's Court, Amalapuram. The 1st defendant accordingly represented it in the subordinate Judge's court, Amalapuram and it was numbered as I. P. No. 5 of 1956. This petition was ultimately dismissed on 23-7-1958. But, on appeal carried by the aggrieved debtor, the District Court, Rajahmundry adjudged him an insolvent on 10-8-1959, and that was affirmed on further appeal by some of the creditors by this court. Meanwhile the a...
Chunduru Chenchuramaiah Sett Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Hindu Religious ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP123
Manohar Pershad, J.1. This appeal is on behalf ofthe unsuccessful plaintiff, whose suit under Section 62 of the Hindu Religions and Charitable Endowments Act for declaration that item 1 of the schedule was the absolute property of the members of the Chunduru family and the performance pf the charities mentioned in the document dated 18-12-1887 was only a charge on the income thereof and that item 2 of the schedule was the absolute property of his family and not part of the specific endowment, has been dismissed bythe Subordinate Judge, Nellore on 27th February 1961.2. The allegation of the plaintiff-appellant was that item 1 of the plaint schedule bearing old S. No. 405 was a tope jointly belonging to the members of Chunduru family, of Nawabpet that the family then consisted of five branches, that on 18-12-1887 the members of Chunduru family executed among themselves a registered agreement to the effect that from the income of the tone, ubhayams or theperformance of Mukkoti Ekadasi and...
Tripurasundari Cotton Press Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, A ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-28-1964
Reported in: [1966]62ITR193(AP)
JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J. - The question that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was asked to refer by this court under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (No. XI of 1922) is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income derived by way of rent in respect of factory, buildings, godowns, etc., of the assessee is income from business assessable under section 10 of the Indian Income-tax Act or income from property assessable under section 9 of the Indian Income-tax Ac ?'The answer to this question would depend upon the nature of the assets in relation to the activity of the assessee.The facts stated by the Tribunal are that the assessee, which was a public limited company, used to carry on the business of pressing cotton. It owned its own cotton press. The assets of the business consisted of buildings, godowns, machinery, etc. The assessment years for which this question has arisen are 1954-55, 1955-56, 1956-57 and 1957-58 for which the respective previou...
K. Jagannadham Vs. District Collector, Kurnool and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-26-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP59
ORDERGopalakrishnan Nair, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 220 of the Constitution asking for an appropriate Writ, order or direction to quash the order passed by the District Collector, Kuniool in his Ref. A. 6-24380/63 dated 4-2-1964. The brief facts lending up to this writ petition are as follows:The petitioner passed his S. S. L. C. Examination in the year 1955 with 'Secretarial course' us his optional subject. 'Secretarial course' consists of drafting, Precis-writing and Typewriting. After having passed the S.S.L.C. examination, the petitioner applied to the Public Service Commission for being admitted to the competitive examination held by it for selection of clerks, etc. The petitioner was duly permitted to sit for the examination which was held by the Public Service Commission in March 1959. He was successful in that examination, and his name was in due course included by the Service Commission in the approved list of candidates for appointment in the Kurnool District. On...
Daggumati Radhakrishnaiah Vs. Yedlapalli Govindu and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP192
Anantanarayana Ayyar, J. 1. This is a petition by D. Radha krishnaiah to revise the order of the learned District Munsif, Nellore in O. S. No. 51 of 1957 giving a finding on Preliminary Issue No. 4. The relevant fuels are as follows: Two plain-tiffs filed O. S. No. 51 of 1957 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Nellore impleading seven defendants. Of these, the second defendant is D. Radhakrishnaiah in his capacity as partner of a firm (Aytha Venkataseshaiah Oil Co.) which included plaintiffs 1 and 2 and also defendant 1 and 2. In the plaint, as originally framed, it was contended that one Aytha Venkata-seshaiah (third defendant) was also a partner of this partnership. This partnership is hereafter referred to for convenience in this order as plaintiff-firm. The first defendant is Aytha Venkataseshaiah. The fourth defendant is another firm called D. Radhakrishnaiah and Aytha Venkata Seshaiah New Account. For convenience, I shall refer to it hereafter as the fourth-defendant fir...
Sri Rama Co-operative Building Society by Its Secretary, Visakhapatnam ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP1
ORDERAnantanarayana Ayyar, J.1. The petitioner Sri Kama Co-operative Building Society, Feels aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam in I. A. No. 61 of 1961 in C. M. A. No. 5 of 1961.2. Relevant facts are as follows:--Bhanoji Rao, who is the sole respondent in this revision petition, filed a petition before the House Real Controller. Visakhapatnam for eviction of Co-operative Society, who is the sole petitioner in this revision petition, on the basis that the Co-operative Society was a tenant of certain premises mentioned by the petitioner. The Society raised a contention thut it was not tenant under Bhanoji Rao and that it was the owner of the premises under a purchase which had been made many years back.3. The Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1949 (Madras Act XXV of 1949) applies to the case. Section 7 of that Act runs as follows:'A tenant shall not be evicted whether in execution of a decree of otherwise except in accordance with t...
Kanamathareddi Kanna Reddy Vs. Kanamatha Reddy Venkata Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP274
Gopalakrishanan Nair, J.(1) This is an appeal from the Judgment of the Subordinate Judge at Eluru dismissing a suit for partition instituted by the plaintiff-appellant. The plaintiff claimed that he and his son, the defendant, constituted a joint Hindu family and that the movable and the immovable properties described in the plaint A, B, and C Schedules were coparcenary properties . He stated, however, that on 22-5-1958, the defendant coerced him to sign a document which purported to be a deed of partition of the joint family properties. This documents was written by D. W. 1, the karnam of the village. In spite of plaintiff's protests, his son forced him to sign it. This took place in the presence of the Karnam and the plaintiff's son-in-law. The plaintiff never agreed to the partition and the document which he was coerced to sign is not binding on him. Subsequently, the plaintiff was made to endorse in favour of the defendant, the promissory notes mentioned in the Plaint C. Schedule. ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›