Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
Puvvada Changayya Vs. Sub Collector, Ongole and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP4
ORDERGopal Rao Ekbote, J.1. The short question involved is as to what is the meaning of the expression used in Section 11 of the Andhra Tenancy Act (XVIII of 1956) 'during the currency of lease', whether that expression is confined to the original contracted lease or it also covers the extension in the lease effected by virtue of Section 10(2) of the said Act. While Umamahes-warain, J. held in Thammiraju v. Pentiah, (1960) 1 Andh WR 75 that that expression would be limited to the period for which the parties have entered into a contract and does not extend to the period mentioned in Section 10(2) of the Act, Satyanarayana Raju. J. observed in Subbaraju v. Dandiganapndy Dharma Cheruyu, (1961) 2 Andh WR 144 at p. 147 thai 'Section 11 has to be lead along with the terms of Section 10(2). The object of Section 11 is to protect the tenant in the event of a change of ownership during the currency of a lease. Notwithstanding the transfer of ownership, the tenant is entitled to the benefit con...
Jelejar Hormosji Gotla Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP288
ORDERSatyanarayana Raju, J.(1) This matter comes before us on a reference made by the First Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, under S. 133 of the Code of Civil Procedure.(2) The point which arises for decision in this reference is whether the Hyderabad Suits Against Government Act (V of 1320 Fasli) Hereinafter referred to as 'the Hyderabad Act' is void by reason of its repugnancy to the Code of Civil Procedure which was extended to the erstwhile State of Hyderabad in April 1951.(3) For a better appreciation of the point in controversy, we may, at the outset, briefly mention the admitted facts.On July 23, 1953, the plaintiff gave notice to the former Government of Hyderabad, under S. 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and on November 23, 1953 instituted the suit against them for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,00,000 by way of damages for an alleged breach of the contract entered into by him with the Government. The Government filed their written statement raising various ...
Somthim Veerabhadra Rao and anr. Vs. Duggirala Lakshmi Devi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP367
(1) This second appeal raises a short but important question in regard to the interpretation of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, hereinafter called 'the Act'.(2) The plaintiffs, who are the appellants, instituted the suit for possession of the suit for possession of the property. It was contended that late Subbarao, the father of the 1st plaintiff and the husband of the 2nd plaintiff died undivided with plaintiffs about ten years before. After the death of Subbarao, his paternal grand-mother Narsamma, who was then living, claimed separate maintenance. The matter was referred to some mediators and consequently the parties entered into a family arrangement on 14-8-1947 under which the suit property was given to Narasamma in lieu of her maintenance during her lifetime with certain restrictions. The defendant, who is her daughter, persuaded Narasamma to execute a deed in her favour which Narasamma had no right to execute.(3) The defendant opposed the action mainly on the ground that...
The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by Collector, Anantapur ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP225
Gopalrao Ekbote, J.1. I think these appeals will have to be allowed on a short point of law. What has happened in these cases was that the consignee instituted two suits against the Government for damages alleging inter aha that he had consigned some bags of rice from a certain station to Hindupur station. The Tahsildar without having any authority seized these rice bags. A criminal complaint was thereafter filed. The matter however ultimately came before the High Court and the High Court held the seizure illegal. As the seizure was illegal and the plaintiff suffered loss on account of this illegal seizure and as there was some shortage also, the consignee claimed damages from tho Government.2. The defence of the State Government was that the Tahsildar acted bona fide, that he was not negligent and that the present suit is barred under Section 16 of the Essential Supplies Act.3. The trial court, after recording the evidence of the parties, decreed the plaintiff's suits finding that the...
Sri Jaya Shri Devi Rajkumari of Vizianagaram Vs. Shri Lalita Kumari De ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-29-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP315
Chandra Reddy, C.J. (1) These appeals are presented against the order of the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, holding that the executors of the estate of Rani Vidyavathi Devi, mother of Rajah of Vizianagaram, who died in March 1957 leaving behind her a will bequeathing all her properties to certain charities, was entitled to receive the amount payable to her out of the interim payments deposited by the Government for Fasil 1367.(2) After the abolition of the Zamindari of Vizianagaram the Government deposited the advance compensation in our about the year 1950. As the final compensation was not paid, they were depositing the interim payments from year to year before the Estates Abolition Tribunal. Vizianagaram. The subject-matter of these appeals relates to such a payment for F. 1367.(3) All the maintenance holders of the estate filed petitions for payment to them of their respective shares out of this deposit. The above mentioned executors also instituted an application for p...
S.P.B.P. Srirangacharyulu Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-28-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP359; [1965]58ITR95(AP)
Kumarayya, J. (1) The Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench has referred the following question under S. 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act : 'Whether in view of the terms of the agreement dated 20-3-1957 , the assessee was entitled to development rebate under S. 10(2)(vi-b) of the Act ?' (2) The assessee runs a bus service. For the assessment year 1958-59, he claimed development rebate in respect of a new bus on the road during the accounting year therefore. The Income-tax Officer refused to grant such relief on the ground that the bus could not be said to have been installed within the meaning of s. 10(2)(vi-b) of the Act. So did the appellate Assistant Commissioner on appeal but on a different ground namely that the assessee was not the owner of the bus to be entitled to such relief. The Appellate Tribunal agreed with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the agreement relied on. This has given occasion to the present reference. (3) It is common ground that the assessee h...
income-tax Officer, Nellore Vs. M. Sundararamireddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP102; [1965]58ITR821(AP)
Chandra Reddy, C.J. (1) This is an appeal against the order of Justice Jagmohan Reddy accepting a petition of the respondent for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus to prevent the Income-tax authorities from collecting the tax pursuant to a certificate issued under Section 46(2) of the Income-tax Act. (2) The material facts which lie in a short compass are as follows: The respondent along with three others was a partner in a mining company called Lakshmi Prasad Mica Mining Co., Gudur, Nellore District. with 24/384 share. In the assessment year 1954-55, on an application by the partnership, its registration was granted by the proper Income-tax Officer. Thereafter the assessment of the firm was made. The total profits of the firm were ascertained and apportioned amongst the partners and this share of the profits was added to the other income of each of the partners and the total income brought of the tax and no tax is due from him to the department. Admittedly, the respondent paid his sha...
Sunkavadli Subbarao Vs. Vuppalapati Narasimharao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP285
(1) The plaintiff appeals from a decision of the Addl. Dt. Judge, given on 21-8- 1961 whereby he set aside the decree passed by the trail Court and decree passed by the trial Court and decreed the plaintiff's suit only for Rs. 350/- The facts which gave rise to the suit may be briefly stated. The plaintiff instituted O. S. 152/52 against the father of the defendants on the foot of promissory notes dt. 20-4-49 and 14-10-50 and obtained a decree against the father. When he put that the decree in execution and attached some joint family property, the sons objected to the execution on the ground that there was a partition of the family property, the sons objected to the execution on the ground that there was a partition of the family property, the sons objected to the execution on the ground that there was a partition of the family property, and therefore the decree obtained against the father cannot be executed against the property which had fallen to the share of the sons. That objection...
President, Tappers Co-operative Society, Kothapalli Vs. Dy. Registrar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1966AP160
ORDERGopalakrishnan Nair, J.1. This is a petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 9-4-1964 passed by the first respondent, Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, on an appeal from an order passed by the petitioner as the President of the Tapper's Co-operative Society, Kothapalli. Respondents 2 to 15 applied to the President of the Co-operative Society (petitioner herein) for being admitted as members of the Society The application was made under Rule 7 of the rules framed under the Hyderabad Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner as President of the Co-operative Society rejected their application. Thereupon they preferred an appeal under Rule 7-A to the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies (first respondent) from the order of the President. The Deputy Registrar allowed the appeal and directed respondents 2 to 15 to be admitted as members of the Society. This order is now impugn ed by the President of the Co-operative...
Ardeshir H.J. Hormasji Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-1964
Reported in: AIR1965AP283; [1966]59ITR57(AP)
Kumarayya, J. (1) This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The following two questions of law, which arise out of I. T. A. No. 9815/1959 -60 9815/1959 -60 have been referred to this court by the income Tax appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench for decision. 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income of the period of 18 months from 1-10-53 to 31-3-1955 being the total income determined for the assessment year 1955-56 was chargeable to tax at the rate applicable to such total income or at the rate applicable to the proportionate income of the period of 12 months? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income from property fell to be assessed for the period of 18 months from 1-10-1953 to 31-3-1955 or for the proportionate period of 12 months only? (2) The assessee in each of the cases is an individual. He derives income from property and from dividends and bank interest. He is a partner in a firm b...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »