Andhra Pradesh Court April 1969 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.
Gidda Naga Malliah and ors. Vs. Kothuri Laxmayya and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP289
ORDER1. These tow revisions by the creditors give rise to an interesting question of law as to whether a District Court Sheristadar, who was directed by the High Court to be in charge of the routine duties of the office of an Offcial Receiver, which action was subsequently ratified by the State Government is competent to sell the insolvent's estate.2. The material facts that gave rise to these revisions lie in a short compass. One Aravapalli Lakshmanaswamy, the second respondent herein, was adjudged insolvent by the Sub Court, Narasaraopet in I. p. No. 40 of 1954 in the year 1955 and his properties vested in the Official Receiver, who did not take possession of the same as nothing material had happened till Ist November. 1960 when he applied for leave preparatory to retirement and handled over charge pursuant to the orders of this Court under Ext. A-1 dated 25th October. 1960, to the Sheristadar, District Court, Guntur, who was directed to be 'in charge of the routine duties of the off...
Ayipala Venkataraya Chetty Vs. Ayipala Ramachandriah Chetty and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP411
Krishnarao, J.1. This appeal involves the determination of the scope and interpretation of O. 33, R 5 (d-1) and R. 6 Civil P. C. as amended in Madras and adopted in Andhra Pradesh. Though the question raised was directly decided by a Division Bench of the Andhra High Court in Venkatasubbaiah v. Thirapathaiah, 1955 Andh WR 261 == (AIR 1955 Andhra 155) and followed in a subsequent Division Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, Sri Mnaohar, learned counsel appearing for one of the respondents in this appeal, challenged the correctness of the view taken by this Court and contended that the view taken by this Court requires reconsideration by a Full Bench in view of the decision of the Madras High Court dissenting from the view taken by the Andhra High Court. It has therefore, become necessary to consider whether the view of this Court requires reconsideration.2. The facts out of which the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises are as follows: The appellant filed a suit O. P. No...
The Madras Mica Association and anr. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1969
Reported in: [1970]25STC332(AP)
Kumarayya, J.1. These two writ petitions, one filed by a registered association, the Madras Mica Association, Gudur, represented by V. Dasa ratha Rami Reddy and the other by a member of the said association, Dasaratha Rami Reddy, himself in his individual capacity calling in ques tion the legality, constitutionality and validity of the Amendment Act 26 of 1961, seek for issue of a writ of mandamus to the State Government, the Commercial Tax Officer, Nellore, and the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Gudur, directing them to forbear from giving effect to the provi sions of the Second Amendment Act (26 of 1961) read with Sections 7(b) and 5 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act so far as they are applicable to the levy and collection of sales tax on mica and to refund the tax already collected under the said provisions.2. Curiously enough notwithstanding that a direction is sought against collection of tax and also for refund of the tax already collected, these petitions do not specif...
Nimmakanyala Audi Narrayanammam Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP119; 1970CriLJ443
1. The complaint filed on February 2, 1965 by the appellant before the Police against Gotur Palreddi and eight others for the offences under Sections 457, 380, 395 and 395 read with 397 I. P. C. was referred as false. Thereupon, a private complaint preferred by her on 1-7-65 before the J.S.C..M., Cuddapah was, after committal tried by the Assistant Sessions judge, Cuddapah in S. C. 5/65 who, by his judgment dated October 28, 1967 acquitted the accused of all the charges leveled against them holding that there was neither truth nor substance in the complaint. On 19-1-1968, the Assistant Sessions Judge filed a complaint before the judicial First Class Magistrate, Cuddapah against the appellant alleging that she had maliciously instituted criminal proceedings against gotur Palreddi and eight others on the false charge of commission of the offence of dacotiy with intent to cause injury to them, knowing that there was no just or lawful ground for such charge or proceeding in his Court, and ...
Rambuddi Veeraswamy Vs. Rambuddi Jangammayya and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP153
ORDER1. These tow revision petitons give rise to an interesting question of law as to whether the persons claiming paramount title independently but not through the mortgagor or mortgagee can be called necessary or proper parties to a suit for redemption of the mortgage.2. The relevant and brief facts that gave rise to these revisions may briefly be stated thus. O. S. No. 60 of 1967 on the file of the Court of District Munisif, Sompet has been filed by the petitioner herein fore redemption of the mortgage executed by his father late Rambuddi Rajayya on 11-9-1933 in favour of the father of the 1st Defendant in respect of Items 1 to 9 of the plaint schedule for a sum of Rs. 200 repayable with interest at 18% per annum. Defendants 2 to 4 had set up a case of adverse possession and paramount title to all the mortgaged properties. It is further averred in the written statement of the 2nd defendant that he sold away Items 7 to 9 in favour of one Rambuddi Haarikrishna. On enquiry, the plainti...
K. Hanumanthiah Setty and Sons and anr. Vs. S. Ramalingappa and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-22-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP286
1. These appeals are against the orders of the Subordinate Judge, Adoni in S. S. Nos. 26 and 31 to 34 of 1967 setting aside the orders of the District Munsif, Adoni dismissing E. A. Nos 3, 4, 5, 9, 10 and 18 of 1966 filed under Section 47 and 151 C. P. C., to declare the sale of the petition schedule lands in execution of the decree in O. S. No. 9 of 1962 as not valid as against the petitioners and to restrain the Ist respondent from taking delivery of the properties sold and to restrain the 2nd respondent from drawing the amounts deposited in Court in E. P. No. 219 of 1964.2. O. S. No. 9 of 1962 on the file of the District Munsif, Adoni was filed by one Hanumanthaiah Setty & Sons, for the recovery of certain monies due on certain dealings. After filing the suit, in I. A. No. 20 of 1962. S. No. 157-B of an extent of Ac. 7-82 cents of land was attached before judgment. After contest, the suit was decreed on 12-3-1962. E. P. No. 219 of 1964 was filed and the attached properties were brou...
Motor Fin. (P) Ltd. (In Liquidation) Vs. Registrar of Companies and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-1969
Reported in: [1970]40CompCas6(AP)
Narasimham, J.1. These two applications are made for directions under Section 518 of the Companies Act (1 of 1956) (to be hereinafter referred to as ' the Act ') in the following circumstances.2. The petitioner in both these applications is the liquidator in the members' voluntary winding up of M/s. Motor Fin. (P) Ltd. The said company went into voluntary liquidation with effect from October 1, 1967. In the course of the liquidation, the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as ' the liquidator ') realised an amount of Rs. 80,500 in respect of which directions are sought. This amount was payable to a creditor of the company, late Raja Venkata Mutyam Rao, who died on November 13, 1965. The amount which was realised, as part of the assets of the company, was invested in a scheduled bank, as required under Section 553 of the Act. Late Mutyam Rao left behind respondents Nos. 2 to 9 in Application No. 53 of 1968, his heirs-at-law. There were differences among them with regard to the division ...
P. Sreeramulu and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-1969
Reported in: AIR1969AP114
Jaganmohan Reddy, C.J. 1. These second appeals have been referred to a Bench by our learned brother, Parthasarathi, J., in view of the different points of view said to have been expressed in decided cases on some aspects of these appeals, namely whether the expression of any comment upon the alleged actions of the delinquents or of the proposed punishments in the very first show cause notice before enquiry would vitiate the enquiry and the finding. It appears that a head Constable and a police constable filed two suits in the District Munisifs Court Cuddaph, which are the subject-matter of these second appeals impugning the validity of the orders of dismissal dated 13th September 1960. The charges against them related to an incident regarding which their conduct was considered unmeritorious and reprehensible. The District Munisif, Cuddapah, disposed of these suits buy a common judgment and one of the issues he decided was whether the order of dismissal passed by Superintendent of Polic...
Tammana Tatayya Vs. Maddi Kutumba Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-1969
Reported in: AIR1971AP177
Krishna Rao, J.1. The above appeals which involve a determination of proper court-fee payable on the Memorandum of first appeal, arises in the following circumstances.2. The respondent in the above two letters Patent Appeal filed a suit in O.S. 36/63 in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Gudivada against the above appellants for recovery of a sum or Rs.15,000. The paintiff alleged that he purchased the property at a Court auction on 1-7-1957 and that he was deprived of possession of the property and of enjoying the profits thereof. by the defendants having taken proceedings to get the sale set aside and thereby delaying the confirmation of the sale until 4-3-1963. The suit was contested on the ground that the plaintiff is not entitled to profits till the confirmation of the sale, and that the suit is barred by limitation etc. That trial Court. while holding that the plaintiff is entitled to profits and 1-7-1957 to 17-6-1963 did not determine the quantum of the profits but directed the sam...
Mantrala Rajagopalam Vs. Vemuri Venkata Subbba Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP269
Gopal Rao Ekbote, J. 1. The question which has to be answered in this Letters Patent Appeal, is, where tow distinct decrees are passed in a suit and an appeal is preferred against only one of them, can it be said that it is an appeal against a portion of the decree in a suit and the final decree in such appeal would save limitation for execution of the other decree from which no appeal was filed under Article 182 (2) of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908. 2. The facts which give rise to this problem may briefly be stated. The appellant filed O. S. No. 476 of 1944 for possession of about 1 acre and 60 cents of land and in the alternative for partition of the same into three equal shares and for separate possession of one such share. The 1st defendant in the suit is the plaintiff's father and the 2nd defendant is his only brother. The 3rd defendant obtained a sale deed D/- 14-6-1944 from the 1st defendant for a consideration of Rupees 1500/-. The plaintiff contended that the sale was not bi...