Andhra Pradesh Court March 1968 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.
Kalangi Krishna Murty and Co. and ors. Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1968
Reported in: [1968]22STC540(AP)
Jaganmohan Reddy, C.J.1. These three writ petitions raise the following questions, namely, whether the Sales Tax Authorities have power (a) to levy penalty for non-production of way bills and (b) to confiscate and forfeit the goods found unaccounted for. In W.P. No. 358 of 1964 the Commercial Tax Officer, Guntur, by an order dated 17th February, 1964, directed the confiscation of 123 bags and 14 kgs. being 1/4th of 492 bags and 56 kgs. of paddy as unaccounted stock and called on the petitioners, a firm, to surrender the said quantity of paddy which had previously been released after the seizure of goods in favour of the assessee on 23rd July, 1963, on payment of Rs. 2,956 as cash security, representing its value. The assessee had tried to explain the excess stock of paddy as being due to the fact that while purchasing the paddy, it (the assessee-firm) weighs each bag at 77 kgs. and enters it in the B. Register at 75 kgs. setting of 2 kgs. as weight of the gunny bag. But this explanatio...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. G. Muralidhar and Co.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-18-1968
Reported in: [1968]22STC285(AP)
Sambasiva Rao, J.1. These two tax revision cases raise an identical question and, therefore, they can be conveniently decided under a common order. The State of Andhra Pradesh is the petitioner. The question that is posed for decision in the cases is whether the Andhra Pradesh State is competent to levy and collect sales tax from the respondents. The answer to that question depends upon the interpretation of the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act).2. It is convenient to note at this stage the relevant facts of both the cases. The respondents are dealers in grains and also commission agents.' During the year 1958-59 they purchased railway receipts relating to consignments of bajra and jawari from non-resident dealers. The first sellers happened to be in Mysore State. They booked the goods to places outside Mysore State and when the goods were in movement, they sold the railway receipts to the respondents, who ...
Official Receiver, Anantapur Vs. Kondeti Surayanarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1968
Reported in: AIR1969AP437
1. The Official Receiver is the appellant, Respondents 1 and 2 are the sons of the 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent was adjudged insolvent on 7-12-1960 on a creditor's insolvency petition I. P. No. 22 of 1960. His sons had already instituted a suit, O. S. No. 46/60, for partition and allotment of 2/3rd share before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Anantapur. On 13-9-60 an ex parte preliminary decree was passed therein, which is marked as Ex. A-3. On an application, I. A. No. 223/61 filed on behalf of the plaintiffs in that suit, the Official Receiver was impleaded as a party to the final decree proceedings. As soon as he was brought on record, the Official Receiver was impleaded as a party to the final decree proceedings. As soon as he was brought on record, the Official Receiver put forth his plea that there are debts due to the creditors and that all these debts are the pre-partition debts and that provision ought to be made in the decree for the payment of the same as they were not ...
Satyanarayana Khaitan (P) Ltd., Chipurupalli Vs. Government of India a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1968
Reported in: AIR1969AP410
ORDER1. In this Writ Petition an order of the Central Government under Rule 54 of the Mineral Concession Rules, which is in the following terms, is challenged:'I am directed to refer to your revision application dated 25-7-1963 and letter dated 1-9-1964 on the above subject and to say that after careful consideration of the grounds stated therein, the Central Government have come to the conclusion that there is no valid ground for interfering with the decision of the Government of Andhra Pradesh rejecting your application for grant of mining lease for manganese over an area of 19-88 acres in B. S. No. 15 of Kothakana village, Cheepurapalli Taluk, Srikakulam District. Your application for revision is, therefore, rejected. Sd/- xxxxxx Under Secretary to the Govt of India.'2. It is easy to recognise in the order a formula which is ever being repeated in such matters. If the name of the village, the Survey Numbers and the extent of land are changed, this Order could well to be the order wh...
Sri Ranganadha Rico Hill and ors. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-12-1968
Reported in: (1969)IILLJ612AP
Gopalrao Ekbote, J.1.This is an application from the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Gapoadon to forbear from recovering the damages from the petitioners in pursuance of the provisions of S,14B of the Employees' Provident Funds Act 19 of 1952. It arises in the following circumstance.2. The petitioners are the rice-millers. In the year 1963 the respondents Bought to enforce the provisions of the Act and the framed there under and called upon the petitioners to remit contributions and administrative charges and asked them to submit returns on the ground that the petitioners' establishments are covered by the Act. The petitioners took objection to the application of the provisions of the Act to the petitioners' concern. Their contention was that the rice mill-employees are not covered by the provisions of the Act or the scheme framed thereunder.3. Since the matter was in doubt and the respondents were insisting upon the compliance of the provisions of the Act, the petitioners fi...
R. Satyanarayana and ors. Vs. Saidayya and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-1968
Reported in: AIR1969AP151
ORDER1. Before dealing with all these connected applications arising out of Election Petition No. 15 of 1967, it is necessary of state the relevant facts in chronological order. AT the last general election held in February 1967, five persons filed their nomination papers with a view to contest the election from the Gajwel reserved constituency for a seat in the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly, They were: (1) Gajweli Saidiah, (2) J. H. Krishnamurthi, (3) A. L. Sailoo, (4) Mannay Balaiah and (5) Perka Narayana. After scrutiny of their nominations on 21-1-1967 the returning officer rejected the nomination paper of Perka Narayana and accepted the nominations of the remaining four candidates as they were found to be in order. On 23-1-1967 Mannay Balaiah gave a notice in writing signed by him to the returning officer, withdrawing his candidature. Thereafter a list of the names of the three contesting candidates was published by the returning officer. Polling took place on 21-2-1967, and...
Associated Transport Co. Vs. V. Hanumantha Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-1968
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ167AP
Kumarayya, J.1. The C.M.A. is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation directing the Associated Transport Company to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,130 within one month from the date of the order. One Durgamma who was said to be an employee of V. Hanumantha Rao died on 2nd December, 1964, in an accident by a lorry A.P.G. No. 5478, driven by one Maqbool Ahmed, an employee of the Associated Transport Company. The said lorry was insured with Ruby General Insurance Company Limited. As a result of the accident which ended in loss of life of Durgamma, her husband filed a petition against P. Hanumantha Rao under the Workmen's Compensation Act. Therein the respondent seems to have agreed to pay the amount claimed which was Rs. 2,100. An order was passed accordingly. Sometime after the order, V. Hanumantha Rao filed a petition claiming his right to be indemnified by Associated Transport Company, Hyderabad. He had impleaded Ruby General Insurance Company as well but that ...
Pulim Chenchi Reddy and ors. Vs. Mungamuri Sivarami Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-05-1968
Reported in: AIR1968AP388; 1968CriLJ1645
ORDER1. The only point that arises for determination in this case is whether after passing the final orders in proceedings under Section 145, Cr.P.C., the Magistrate could pass a separate order regarding costs under Section 148(3), Cr.P.C., on the application filed by the successful party. 2. In M.C. No. 2 of 1966 with regard to proceedings under Section 145, Cr.P.C., a final order was passed by the Court on 22-7-1966 and there was no order with regard to costs. The successful party styled as A-Party thereupon came forward with an application dated 27-9-1966 for the awarding of costs. They claimed that they spent a sum of Rs. 663.50 being the amounts paid towards Commissioner's fee, Commissioner's expenses, watching charges and advocate's fee but claimed only Rs. 500. After a counter was filed the Magistrate passed an order granting costs of Rs. 500. Hence this petition to revise that order. 3. Section 148(3), Cr.P.C., says that'when any costs have been incurred by anyparty to a procee...
Andhavarapu Sreeramamurthy and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1968
Reported in: AIR1969AP225
ORDER1. On 1-8-1963, the Regional Transport Authority, Visakhapatnam, took up for consideration the question of grant of two stage carriage permits on the route Visakhapatnam to Srikakulam. The rout is a medium route as defined by R. 212 (1) (I) (b) of the Motor Vehicles Rules of 1964 corresponding to Rule 153-D (A) (i) (b) of the old rules. There were as many as 75 applicants. After eliminating all the applicants who got less than five marks the Regional Transport Authority considered the applications of those who got five marks and amongst them preferred the Ramdas Motor Transport Limited, Visakhapatnam and M. V. Ramdas for the two permits. The Ramdas Motor Transport Limited was preferred on the ground that the company was located at Visakhapatnam where it had a good workshop and that its history-sheet was clean. M. V. Ramdas was preferred on the ground that, though he resided at Vizianagaram, he had a branch office Visakhapatnam and that he also owned a workshop, his history sheet w...
In Re: Pallela Ramara and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1968
Reported in: 1969CriLJ1453
Narasimham, J.1. The appeal and the two revisions periam to tha judgment o the Additional Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, in Sessions Ca3e No. 17 of 1966, by which he convicted A 1 under Section 304, Part II, Penal Code for causing the death of the Pallela Satyanarayana of Kunchangi on 16-2.1966 and A-2 and A3 under Section 20, Penal Code foe causing hurt to the said Pallela Satyasarayana in the course of tha same transition. A.2 and A-3 are farther convicted under Section 328, Penal Code for voluntarily causing hurt to the deceased's brother, Pallela Ammannadora by hitting him with sticks in the course of the same transaction. A 1 was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and A-2 and A-3 were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months on each of the counts, the sentences to run concurrently.2. The occurrence took place at about 7.30 P. M. on 16-2-1963 near the 'Kammara Sala' (the village smith) in Kunchangi village. The deceased and the injured were brothers and residen...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›