Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.
Akasam Peda Sanyasi and ors. Vs. Sri Rajah K.V.G. Prabhakara Murthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP222
ORDERP. Satyanarayana Raju, C.J.1. This is a petition for revising the order of the Subordiate Judge of Kakinada directing that the plaintiff in O. S. No 29/1959 on his file be examined on commission. The suit was for the recovery of possession of lands on the basis of title. In the affidavit filed by the plaintiff in support of her application for issue of commission, she has stated that she belongs to the Telaga community and according to the custom obtaining among her people, she observes Gosha and that she does not attend Court. There is a further ground that she is suffering from an ailment which necessitates rest in bed. The defendant filed a counter affidavit denying the allegation made by the plaintiff. In paragraph 2 of the counter affidavit, the defendant specifically alleged as follows:'The petitioner is almost daily coming to court in the afternoon in connection with her several litigations.'Mr. N.C.V. Ramanujachary, leaned counsel for the plaintiff (respondent) has fairly ...
Tungabhadra Industries Ltd., Kurnool Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP85; [1966]17STC366(AP)
Basi Reddy, J. 1. These Tax Revision Cases were referred to a Full Bench by a Division Bench consisting of two of us (Basi Reddy and Mohamed Mirza, JJ.) because it was contended with some plausibility that the ruling of a Division Bench of this Court composed of Chandra Reddy, C. J. and Krishna Rao, J. in Berar Oil Industries v. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, (1959) 10 STC 199 (AP), negativing the challenge based upon Article 14 of the Constitution as to the validity of a Government notification dated November 9, 1951, --amending Rule 5 (1) (k) of the Madras General Sales Tax (Turnover and Assessment) Rules, by the addition of the words 'other than refined groundnut oil' and adding Sub-rule (5) to Rule 18 of the said Rules, the effect of which was the withdrawal of the benefit of the deduction of the purchase price of groundnut or kernel which went into the manufacture of refined oil, from the sale turnover of such oil, required reconsideration, in the light of certain observ...
Chityala Venkata Satyanarayanamurthi Vs. Chityala Veera Venkata Satyan ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-28-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP349
Narasimham, J.1. These appeals arise out of O. S. 65 of 1957 and O. S. 83 of 55 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Eluru, respectively which were tried together as connected. For the said reason, the appeals are heard together. 2. O. S. 65 of 1957 was filed by the sons of the 1st defendant, Chityala Ramakrishnamurthi as paupers for the partition of family properties into three equal shares and allotment of two such shares to the plaintiffs and for other incidental reliefs. 3. The case they alleged is that they and the 1st defendant, their father, constituted an undivided Hindu family. Defendants 4 to 6 are their unmarried sisters, and the 3rd defendant is their mother. The 2nd defendant is the divided brother of the 1st defendant, they having partitioned in or about 1926. It is their case that their father became addicted to vices and so inclined debts for illegal and immoral purposes. The 1st defendant, their father, executed two sale deeds in favour of the 2nd defendant, his divid...
Manyam Meenakshamma Rajajmundry Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Andhra ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-1965
Reported in: AIR1967AP189; [1967]63ITR534(AP)
Krishna Rao, J.(1) This is a reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act (XXVII of 1957). The assessee Srimathi Manyam Meenakshamma, a resident of Rajahmundry was assessed to a total wealth of Rs. 5,19,191by the Wealth Tax Officer in regard to the assessment year 1957-58 for which the relevant valuation date is 31-3-1957. She owned extensive immovable properties, including forest and agricultural lands and buildings situated at various places. The forest measuring about 200 sq. miles was valued by her at Rs. 21,000. The Wealth Tax Officer, however, determined its value to be Rs. 2,00,000 as he found that the average income during the last three assessment years was Rs. 10,000 and capitalized this income 20 times. The agricultural lands had been taken over by the Government under the Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryyotwari) Act (XXVI of 1948). The Wealth Tax Officer included the balance of Rs. 71,279 of the compensation amount payable to the assessee in her total wealth...
Pokala Ranganayakamma Vs. Modireddy Venkatachalapati Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP91
Satyanarayana Raju, C.J. 1. The S. R. is sought to be filed as a Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Section 151 C. P. C. to vacate the judgment passed in A. S. No. 54/1960 on the file of the limit Court and to set aside the decree and judgment of the trial Court and to order a retrial of the suit. The office look objection to the maintainability of the petition on the ground that the judgment and decree in the appeal can only be set aside by way of a review or a further appeal.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petition is maintainable as he is seeking to set aside the judgment and decree on grounds other than those permitted under Order 47 C. P. C. As supporting his contention, the learned counsel has relied upon a decision of the Madras High Court in Perumal Moopan v. Venkatachariar, 12 Mad LJ 503: (AIR 1922 Mad 193). There the Registrar of Cooperative Credit Societies applied to the Dirstrict Judge to set aside a decree in appeal on the ground that the Socie...
In Re: H.V. Jagdesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP35; 1966CriLJ126
Basi Reddy, J.1. The question that falls for determination by the Full Bench is, whether an employee of the Indian Airlines Corporation, which is a corporation established under the Air Corporations Act, 1953, is a 'public servant'within the meaning of the Twelfth clause of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. That clause and Explanation 4 were added by the Criminal Law Amendment Act (II of 1958). The purpose of the amendment was to bring within the purview of the anti-corruption law, as enacted in the Indian Penal Code and in the Prevention of Corruption Act, the employees of statutory trading corporations and Government companies, which manage a great deal of public money and public property as a necessary consequence of the rapid expansion of Governmental activities in a Welfare State. In the amended form, Section 21, so far as is material, reads thus: 'Section 21:-- Public Servant: The words 'public servant' denote a person falling under any of the descriptions hereinafter followin...
Vijayalakshmi Talkies (Private) Ltd., Masulipatnam and ors. Vs. A. Kot ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP285; [1967]37CompCas605(AP)
1. This is an appeal against the order of winding up of Vijayalakshmi Talkies (Private) Ltd., (hereinafter called the Company) made in Company Petition No. 3 of 1963 by our learned brother, Satyanarayana Raju, J., as he then was. This Company was incorporated in May 1960 as a private Company limited by shares, its registered office being located at Masulipatnam. It started its business on August 1, 1962 with a nominal capital as Rs. 1,60,000 divided into 16 equity shares of Rs. 10,000 each. The total number of its shareholders did not exceed 11. The affairs of the Company did not run smoothly owing to group politics and sharp differences between the shareholders. The Company's liabilities as a result erelong rose by leaps and bounds. The petitioner, one of the shareholders owning one share of Rs. 10,000, in despair, made the application for winding up.The grounds on which it is based as shown in the petition and vouched for in the affidavit are that the Company is heavily indebted and ...
G. Thirupaliah Vs. State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP223; 1966CriLJ745
ORDERAnantanarayana Ayyar, J.1. In C. C. No. 2 of 1964, the Public Prosecutor filed a complaint against one Thirupalaiah complaining of an offence under Section 500 I. P. C. for having defamed a Government servant viz. Tahsildar in the discharge of his duties. In that case, the accused cited defence witnesses. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Cuddapah has passed an order directing the accused to deposit reasonable charges for the defence witnesses. The petitioner filed this petition to revise the above order.2. The learned Additional Sessions Judge passed the order on the basis of Section 257(2) Cr. P. C. It is mentioned in the said section that the Magistrate may require reasonable expenses of witnesses to be deposited in the Court.3. Rule 384 of the Criminal Rules of Practice runs as follows:'..,,... the Criminal Courts will pay, at the rates specified in Rule 387, the expenses of complainants and witnesses in cases in which the prosecution is instituted or carried on by, or under t...
Sultan Saleh BIn Omer Vs. Vijayachand Sirimal
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP295
ORDERVenkatesam, J.1. This petition is for revising the order passed by the 3rd Assistant Judge City Civil Court, Hyderabad in I. A. No. 765 of 1964 in O. S. No. 93 of 1963, filed by the defendants.2. The facts relevant for determination of the question in controversy may briefly be stated.The suit was filed on the foot of a promissory note, and the defence was that it was not executed in the circumstances stated by the plaintiff, and that it was not supported by consideration. Naturally, the plaintiff had to prove execution, and the defendant had to establish want of consideration. Appropriate issues were framed. On 8-4-1964, the trial of the suit commenced, when P. W. 1 was examined and the evidence on his side was closed, reserving his right to adduce rebuttal evidence on the issue relating to absence of consideration. After some adjournments, the suit was posted to 4-7-1984 for the evidence of the defendants. On that day, the plaintiff and his Advocates were absent, but the Advocat...
R. Srinivasan Vs. the Official Liquidator Vegetols Ltd., in Liquidatio ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP224; [1967(14)FLR70]; (1967)IILLJ706AP
ORDERJaganmohan Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the Official Liquidator in Claim No. 7 in O. P. 4/1957, applying 8. 25FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and also disallowing the claim for priority under Section 530(1)(b) of the Companies Act 1956. The appellant relies on Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act and claims 6 months' wages, while only 3 months' wages have been paid under Section 25-FFF, as also one month's pay in lieu of notice. A reading of Section 25-FFF would itself show that by virtue of the explanation to that section, 'an undertaking which is closed down by reason merely of financial difficulties (including financial losses) or accumulation of undisposed stocks, shall not be deemed to have been closed down on account of unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the employer within the meaning of the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 25-FFF which contingency alone will attract the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 25-FFF. whic...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »