Andhra Pradesh Court March 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.
K. Basivi Reddy and ors. Vs. Guntur Municipality
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-02-1967
Reported in: AIR1969AP325
1. These are an appeal and a cross appeal arising out of the original Suit No. 152/61 on the file of District Munsif's Court, Guntur filed by three plaintiffs in a representative capacity against the Guntur Municipality represented by its Commissioner and Special Officer for a declaration that the notice dated 14-3-1961 under Section 241 of the District Municipalities Act issued by the defendant to the effect that the unlicensed dogs straying within the Guntur Municipal limits would be destroyed from 1-4-1961 is void, illegal and without jurisdiction and the consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendant Municipality and its subordinates from catching and destroying dogs in pursuance thereof or in the alternative for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant Municipality and its subordinates from catching the dogs with the aid of scissors or from beating or clubbing them with sticks or from putting them in cage and killing them by cynogassing.2. The three plaintiff...
Karmam Swami Rao and anr. Vs. Kurnool Sanskruth Vidyadana Samajam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-02-1967
Reported in: AIR1968AP147
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, C.J.1. This revision petition has been referred to a Full Bench by our learned brothers Basi Reddy and Gopal Rao Ekbote. JJ. as raising the following two important questions for determination, viz.1. Whether a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act (XXI of 1860) is a corporation? And 2. If the answer is in the affirmative, whether it is a corporation formed in pursuance of a special Indian Law? Initially the revision petition came up for hearing before Manohar Pershad. J. (as he then was), before whom it was contended that the lower court was wrongs in relying on Rukminamma v. Venkata Ramdas. 1940-2 Mad LJ 554 = (AIR 1940 Mad 949) distinguishing the case of Bank of Bapatla v. Manvam Bibi. 1954-2 Mad LJ (Andh) 215 which contention according to the learned Judge though devoid of sufficient force, nonetheless, having regard to the divergence of opinion was sufficiently important to be referred to a Bench, 2. The relevant provisions of the Madras Agri...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›