Andhra Pradesh Court December 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.
P. J. Udani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-1964
Reported in: [1967]63ITR766(AP)
KUMARAYYA J. - The two questions referred for decision, one under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act and the other under section 66(2), both arising out of I.T.A. No. 1310/1959-60 1310/1959-60 , are in the following terms :'1. Whether, in the circumstances and on the facts of the case, the transaction of purchase and sale of lands in question was an adventure in the nature of trade ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the profits alleged to have been made by the assessee related to the assessment year 1949-50 or 1950-51; and if really they related to 1949-50, whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to direct the Income-tax Officer to tax the gains for the assessment year 1949-50 ?'The reference relates to the assessment year 1950-51 for which the relevant accounting period is the year ended on August 31, 1949. The assessment for that year was originally made on a total income of Rs. 18,125, being 1/3rd of the share of the assessee in the firm of Messrs....
D. Sanjeevayya Vs. the Election Tribunal, Hyderabad and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP9
Basi Reddy, J.1. Although arguments in this case have travelled far and wide, the central question that falls for determination is a short and simple one, and may be formulated thus:Whether under Section 86(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, it is incumbent on the Election Commission to cause a copy of an affidavit accompaying in election petition, to be published in the Official Gazette and to be sewed on the respondent to an election petition, before inferring the petition to an Election Tribunal for trial2. Before answering this question, it is necessary to get out a few preliminary facts which are not in dispute. At the last General Election to the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly held in February, 1962, the petitioner in this writ petition and the 2nd respondent were the contesting candidates for election from the Kodumuru Constituency in Kurnool District. On February 25, 1962, the petitioner was declared to have been elected by a majority of about seven thousand...
Budan Khan Vs. Estate Officer, Hyderabad and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP336
Ekbote, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Prohibition restraining the 2nd respondent from proceeding with the ease of eviction against the petitioner under the Andhra Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the 'impugned Act').2. The essential facts in order to appreciate the merits of the contentions raised before us are that the petitioner took on lease a site known as South-east corner plot of Victoria Zenana Hospital, Hyderabad from the former Government of Hyderabad for the purpose of erecting a petrol pump. The rent fixed was O. S. 15/- (Rs.) per month. The petitioner thereafter constructed the petrol pump and was carrying on petrol business. Subsequently on 24-8-1954 the lease was renewed and the rent agreed to be paid was Rs. 21 per month. In April 1962, the Government of Andhra Pradesh asked the petitioner to pay Rs. 40 per month instead of Rs. 21. With some hesi...
Buddala Veerabhadra Rao Vs. Duddumpudi Venkatraju and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1964
Reported in: 1966CriLJ1080
ORDERAnantanarayana Ayyar, J.1. Buddala Veerabhadrarao of Samalkot filed a petition before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kakiuada praying for an order under Section 145, Criminal P.C. in his favour against six respondents cited therein. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate forwarded the petition to the Station House Officer, Samalkot for enquiry and report. On the report of the Station House Officer, the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate took the case on file as M.C. No. 8 of 1963 and passed a preliminary order under Section 145, Criminal P.C. on 22.11.1963. He also attached the properties in dispute and appointed the Revenue Inspector of Samalkot to take possession of the property with crop which stood on it. Subsequently, the case was transferred to the Additional District Muusif Magistrate, Kakinada and became M.C. No. 12 of 1961 on his file. Affidavits and documents were filed on both sides. After due consideration of those affidavits and documents, he passed final order ...
Kalva Suryanarayana Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-3, A-ward, Hyderabad.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-1964
Reported in: [1966]59ITR315(AP)
BASI REDDY J. - This application under article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by one Kalva Suryanarayana for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent (the Income-tax Officer, A-3, A-Ward, Hyderabad) to forbear from acting in pursuance of a notice issued under section 45 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), on the ground that the petitioner is not liable to pay the tax demanded from him by that notice. The impugned notice runs as follows :'GIR No. 123-K Office of the Income-tax Officer,A-Ward, Hyderabad,Dated : 22-6-1961.Notice under section 45 of the Income-tax Act.Income-tax arrears - Collection of - M/s. Kalva Suryanarayana (1st Gulmoha Contract) 1951-52.Whereas Sri Kalva Suryanarayana has been a partner in the firm of M/s. Kalva Suryanarayana (1st Gulmoha Contract) in the assessment for the year 1951-52 which has since been dissolved.Whereas the partners in the said firm, which has been assessed as registered firm, Sri M. ...
D. Murugappa Mudaliar Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Guntur and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-18-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP433
ORDER(1) The petitioner in this writ petition asks for a writ of Mandamus to compel the 'Authority under the Minimum Wages Act' to entertain his application under R. 34 (4) of the Rules framed under that Act and adjudicate upon it on merits. The circumstances leading up to this writ petition are as follows :The Inspector of Factories, Nellore, who is the second respondent herein filed an application under sub-s. (2) of S. 20 of the Minimum Wages Act before the 'Authority under the Minimum Wages Act'. A notice of that application was issued to the petitioner, who was a respondent therein. However, the petitioner was not present at the time of the hearing of the application or its disposal. The Authority under the Minimum Wages Act set the employer ex parte and allowed the application of the Inspector of Factories on 24-7-63. A copy of this order was despatched to the employer (the petitioner herein) only on 11-10-63. The petitioner received it the next day. Thereupon, he filed on 7-11-6...
Shaik Ali and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by the Secy ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP42
Basi Reddy, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari to quash a notification issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh (G. O. Ms. No. 296, Home (Transport-IV), dated 12th February, 1963 approving a scheme of nationalisation of road transport in respect of the route Hyderabad to Kalvakurthy, and also to quash the order of the Regional Transport Authority, Mahabubnagar, dated 25th February, 1964 (in C. No. 11873/A2/63), whereby an applicationof the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (which will be, referred to as 'the Corporation') for the issue of three stage carriage permits in respect of the notified route Hyderabad to Kalvakurthy, was granted and the existing permits of the three petitioners were cancelled.2. The facts material for the purpose of this writ petition are as follows: The three petitioners are motor transport operators who had been plying their vehicles for a long time on the route -- Hyderabad to K...
Roopchand Chandanmal and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1964
Reported in: [1966]59ITR624(AP)
JAGANMOHAN REDDY J. - The question that has been referred to us is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appeal filed by an ex-partner of the dissolved firm before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was competent ?'Perhaps, at the time when the Appellate Tribunal refused to entertain the appeal, it had very probably applied the principles settled by the Full bench in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rayalaseema Oil Mills. But later their Lordships of the Supreme Court in C. A. Abraham v. Income-tax Officer, Kottayam, have held that penalty and assessment can be made on partners of the firm even after the dissolution of the firm. Having regard to this principle, an ex-partner of a dissolved firm also can, as a consequence of this decision, agitate in appeal any penalty or assessment made against him and by which he is aggrieved. Several references of this nature have also been answered by this court in the affirmative.This reference is answered accordingly. No...
K. Parasuramaiah Vs. Pokurl Lakshmamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP220
Chandrasekhara Sastry, J.(1) The question that arise for determination in this case is one under Sec. 10(3)(c) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction Control) Act, 1960 which is as follows : 'A landlord who is occupying only a part of a building whether residential or non-residential, may, notwithstanding anything in clause (a), apply to the Controller for an order directing any tenant occupying the whole or any portion of the remaining part of the building to put the landlord in possession thereof, if he requires additional accommodation for residential purposes or for the purpose of a business which he is carrying on, as the case may be.' On this point two decisions of this court are placed before me. One is the decision in Shajehan Saheb v. Yakub Khan Saheb, (1962) 1 Andh WR 205 at p. 210 in which it is held that :' ................................... The landlord cannot evict a tenant from a residential building when he required it for a non-residential purpose ;...
Kurcha Sanyasinaidu Vs. Chode Suryarao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP330
Basi Reddy, J.(1) This case has been referred to a Division Bench because of a seeming conflict between a decision of the Madras High Court in Chinnappa Tharakan v. Ittichi Amma, AIR 1926 Mad 765 : 50 Mad LJ 580 and a recent decision of this Court in Veeraraghavayya v. Venkata Subbaraya Sastri, : AIR1964AP94 as to the true scope of Rule 89 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure. (2) The relevant facts giving rise to this revision petition are as follows : The 1st respondent obtained a money decree in O. S. No. 146 of 1954 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kakinada, against the 2nd respondent. In belonging to the judgment-debtor were put to auction on 11-6-1962, but only one item (Lot No. 1) was sold for a sum of Rs. 1500. The successful bidder was the 4th respondent. It is important to note that the proclamation of sale specified that an amount of Rs. 15,733-87 nP. was due under the decree and the property of the judgment-debtor was being brought to sale for the recove...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »