Skip to content

Andhra Pradesh Court January 1967 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.

Jan 25 1967

Jujjuvarapu Kotamma Vs. Pappala Simhachalam and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Decided on: Jan-25-1967

Reported in: AIR1969AP76

Kumarayya, J.1. This short point that falls for determination in this second appeal is whether the suit of the plaintiff is barred by the principle of res judicata on account of the decision in O. S. 152 of 1942 against the 5th defendant which has become final having been affirmed by the Appellate Courts. Of course, there is another point raised, grounded, as it is either on what is alleged to be want of cause of action for the palintiff or extinction of her right, if any, by reason of the sale deed in favour of the 5th defendant. Based as the action of the plaintiff is on the theory and assertion that her sale deed is a valid sale deed, it is neither proper nor possible for us to pronounce on this question when it is obvious that if the question of res judicata be decided in favour of the plaintiff, correct decision of the said question can be based only on the facts that may be investigated and found by the Courts below. Of course if the question of res judicata is held against the p...


Jan 04 1967

Ghasiram Agarwalla Vs. Commissioner of Gift-tax, Assam.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Decided on: Jan-04-1967

Reported in: [1968]69ITR235(AP)

NAYUDU J. - The following questions have been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Calcutta, namely :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amount of Rs. 91,668 inherited by Ghasiram Agarwalla from his deceased father under section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, was his absolute property ?(2) Whether, on the division of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 91,668 between Ghasiram Agarwalla and his three sons, there was a gift of Rs. 68,751 by Ghasiram Agarwalla to his three sons which was assessable to gift-tax ?'The facts of the case which are beyond doubt may be briefly stated. The rise mill called Sagarmal Ghasiram Rice Mill of Ramgiya was owned by a Hindu undivided family governed by the Mitakshara School of Hindu law of which Sagarmal Agarwalla was the karta. Subsequently, there was a partial partition in this family as a result of which the rice mill was taken out of the joint family assets a...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial