Andhra Pradesh Court January 1965 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.
Sri Rajah Velugoti Rangamannar Krishna Yachendra Bahadur Varu and ors. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP121
Narasimham, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of dismissal of the suit, O. S. 8 of 1957, by the District Judge, Chittoor. This suit was laid for a declaration that the notifications made under the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act 1948, hereinafter to be referred to as the Act with regard to the plaint schedule villages, were invalid. After the suit was filed, the State Government issued revised notifications classifying some of the plaint schedule villages as under-tenure estates under the Act. The trial was therefore confined to notifications with regard to 10 villages only, viz., Inagalore, Mannavram, Govindaraopalli, Polie Beemava-ram, Kandaragunta, Empedu, Ammacheruvu, Bassiddummallu and Vampalli, as zamin estates. The plaintiffs questioned the validity of the notifications, as, according to them, each of the villages was an under-tenure estate: under the Act, whereas the Government notified them as Zamin estates. 2. Issues...
Pindukuru Balarami Reddy Vs. Jaladanki Venkatasubbaiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-1965
Reported in: AIR1965AP386
(1) This revision is directed against the order of the District Munsif, Gudur dated 2-1-1962 refusing to receive a plaint presented at his residence at about 8-30 p. m., that is, after court hours. The suit was sought to be filed on the foot of a promissory note dated 1-1-1959 on the last day of limitation, that is, 2-1-1962. When it was presented to the District Munsif at his residence after the court hours at 8-30 p. m., he refused to receive it. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Court had jurisdiction either to accept or reject it, but once the Court accepted it, it could not return the plaint with an endorsement refusing to accept it. In this connection, the learned counsel drew my attention to the case of Thakur Dinram v. Hari Das, ILR 34 All 482; Sattayya Padayachi v. Sundarathachi 46 Mad LJ 78 : (AIR 1924 Mad 448) (FB) and Tula Ram v. Bhajan Singh, : AIR1953All609 .(2) Before discussing the authorities cited, I would like to refer to O. IV, R I...
Central Glass Factory (Madras) Firm Vs. Special Commercial Tax Officer ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-1965
Reported in: [1967]20STC69(AP)
ORDERGopalakrishnan Nair, J.1. The writ petitioner is a partnership-firm situated in Madras doing business in the manufacture of glass under the name and style of Central Glass Works. This firm has three partners of which D. V. Shah is one. The firm was constituted under a registered partnership-deed dated 9th July, 1956, and actually started the glass factory at Madras on and from 22nd August, 1956.2. D. V. Shah, one of the partners of this Madras firm, along with another partner from Nagpur had established earlier a partnership firm in Nagpur for manufacturing glass. That firm also was known as 'Central Glass Works'. Thus, D. V. Shah along with another partner constituted the Nagpur firm, and D. V. Shah and two others unconnected with the Nagpur firm, constituted the Madras firm. D. V. Shah remained the common factor in these two firms.3. On account of certain inter-State sales, the Sales Tax Authorities of Andhra Pradesh assessed the Nagpur firm to a sales tax of Rs. 1,171.87 nP. in...
Devi Chand Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-1965
Reported in: AIR1965AP415; 1965CriLJ602
Basi Reddy, J. (1) This is a petition under Article 226 of the constitution by one Devi Chand for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad in C. No. VIII/ 10/11/63, dated 29-7-1963, imposing on him a penalty of Rupees 50,000/- under S. 112 of the customs Act, 1962(hereinafter called 'the Act') for having abetted the smuggling into Indian customs waters of a large quantity of spice of the value of Rs. 2.7 lakhs in a launch from Ceylon and the subsequent landing of the goods at an unfrequented seashore near Eathamukkala in Ongole taluk, Guntur District. In respect of the same transaction, penalties ranging from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 7,00,000/- were imposed on five other persons including one Md. Salab Sahib, who has filed the companion writ petition No. 1248 of 1963. (2) We should like to say at once that the petitioner has chosen to bypass section 128 of the Act, under which an aggrieved person has a right of appeal to the Central ...
Pingali Sivakumar and ors. Vs. Doli Sivaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP14
Basi Reddy, J.1. The question raised here is, whether Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act -- 36 of 1963 -- which has come into force on 1-1-1964 -- applies to the present revision petition, which was filed on 1-1-1964, on which date the period of limitation, namely, sixty days prescribed for such revisions under Section 93 of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, had expired. It has been well settled by a series of decisions of this Court that Section 5 of the old Limitation Act of 1908 had no application to appeals or revisions filed under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. Since the period of limitation had expired by the date on which the present revision was filed, obviously the delay in filing the revision, could not have been condoned under the old Limitation Act.2. But the contention of the learned Advocate for the petitioners is that Section 31 of the new Act, by implication, attracts Section 5 of the Limitation Act even to appeals and revisions fi...
P. Jayanidhi and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP30
ORDERGopalakrishnan Nair, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is preferred by eight students of the Medical Colleges in the Telangana area to compel the respondents by Mandamus to permit them (Petitioners) to appear for the ensuing First M. B. B. S. examination to be held by the Osmania University (Second Respondent.) Peti-tioners 1 and 5 are students of Osmania Medical College, Petitioner 4 is it student of Kakatiya Medical College, Warangal and the other petitioners are students of Gandhi Medical College, Hyderabad. All of them joined their respective Medical Colleges in the year 1959. The entire course of studies they had to undergo was to last six years. This course is called the 'Integrated Medical Course'. The first year of this course is known us Pre-medical year and the students have to pass a University examination at the end of that year. All the petitioners passed that examination. Then they came in the second year of the Integrated Medical course.A...
Kolli Eranna and ors. Vs. Bellamkonda Thimmaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP184
Chandrasekhara Sastry, J. 1. The question raised in these revision petitions relates to the amount of Stamp duty payable on an award. The plaintiffs sought to obtain a decree in terms or an award under Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The plaintiffs and the defendants were partners carrying on several businesses and due to disputes, which arose between them, they referred the matter to arbitration by two arbitrators with a provision to have third arbitrator as an umpire. The award is dated 28-11-59. It was sent to the lower Court by the arbitrators by post on 25-1-61. When P. W. 1, one of the arbitrators, was in the witness box, this award was put to him. Then the 1st defendant's counsel Mr. D.L. Chetty objected to the admissibility of the document; but the document was marked as Ex. A. 9, while at the same time in the deposition of P.W. I, it was noted by the court as follows: 'Mr. D.L. Chetty for 1st defendant objects to the admissibility -- As there is an issue No. 6...
M. Gurunatha Rao Vs. B. Ramamurthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1965
Reported in: AIR1965AP479
Basi Reddy, J.(1) This revision petition has been filed by the plaintiff under S. 12 of the Hyderabad Small Cause Courts Act. It is directed against the judgment and decree of the Court of Small Causes at Hyderabad in Small Cause Suit No. 298/61 decreeing the plaintiff's suit only in part for a sum of Rs. 25 and directing the plaintiff to pay the costs of the suit to the defendant, while dismissing the rest of the claim of the plaintiff . the suit was instituted by the plaintiff for the recovery of rent, water and electric charges amounting to Rs. 105-75 nP. The trial of the suit commenced on 12-7-61 when the witness of both parties were examined and some documents were marked. 'The evidence was closed and the case was posted to 15-7-61 for arguments. On that date, however, the case was adjourned to 19-7-61. On. 19-7-61, the defendant and his advocate were absent. The defendants Advocate addressed arguments and judgment was reserved. Then, on 28-7-61, the learned Additional Judge deliv...
Sri Vadrevu Venkappa Rao Vs. the Commissioner of Gift-tax, Andhra Prad ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP83; [1974]95ITR313(AP)
Jaganmohan Reddy, J. 1. The question that has been referred to us under Section 26(1) of the Gift Tax Act (1958) (hereinafter called the Act) by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is 'whether the gift made by Sri Vadrevu Venkappa Rao who is a karta of the Hindu undivided family to his wife of a part of Hindu undivided family property is exempt under Section 5(1)(viii) of the Act.'2. The assesses filed a return for the assessment year 1958-59, for the relevant accounting year ending with 31-3-1958, under the Gift Tax Act in respect of a gift made to his wife, by a deed of gift dated 18-9-1957, of Act 15-46 cents of land, of the value as given on the deed of Rs. 23,000. The Gift Tax Officer did not allow the exemption under Section 5(1)(viii) of the Act, because the donor was a Hindu undivided family. Before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, it would appear that the assessee contended that the gift made by a Hindu undivided family to the wife of Karta should have been exempted from ta...
Chinna Ram Reddy (Died) Venkat Reddy and ors. Vs. Kishta Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1965
Reported in: AIR1965AP471
Gopal Rao Ekbote, J. (1) The action out of which this second appeal arises was laid by the appellants against the defendants. It was alleged inter alia in the plaint that the watan of Police Patel of Village Siddapur, Sangareddy Taluq, belonged to the family of the parties. Although once the family was joint, it is now divided, in the said watan, Kishta Reddy the grand - father of the defendant, had eight annas share, Sur Reddy, the father-in-law of the 4th plaintiff , had four annas share and the father of the first three plaintiffs had the rest of four annas. There is no dispute in so far as eight annas share belonging to Bag Reddy are concerned. The dispute is confined only to the four annas, share, which according to the parties, belonged to Sur Reddy. Sur Reddy died in 1339 Fasli and he is succeeded by his widow Chandramma. Chandramma also died on 4th Dai, 1350 Fasli. The 4th plaintiff Sangamma claimed the succession after the death of Chandramma. she applied in the Tahsil office ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »