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.
P. Chitta Reddi Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-1969
Reported in: [1969]24STC317(AP)
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, C.J.1. In this revision case, the simple question that falls for determination is whether burnt cinders are 'coal' or 'coke' within the meaning of item 1 of Schedule IV of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, hereinafter called the 'Act', which defines 'coal' as including coke in all its forms. It appears that the assessee is a person who purchased from the President of India cinders from out of the refuse of the railway engines and the sales tax authorities are seeking to assess them as 'general goods' under Section 5(1) of the Act.2. The Tribunal has relied on the decision in Mahabir Singh Ram Babu v. Assistant Sales Tax Officer [1962] 13 S.T.C. 248 of the Allahabad High Court where Brijlal Gupta, J., held that cinder is not coal. Mr. Sundara Rao by reference to the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. Raipur Manufacturing Co. A.I.R. 1967 S.C. 1066, wherein cinders have been held as by-products of coal, contends that it is 'coal' within the m...
P. Anthaiah and Sons Vs. Kummarikantha Dibbayya and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP380
Krishna Rao, J.1. This appeal is filed by the first Defendant. The first respondent herein filed a suit O. S. 53 of 1959 in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Narasaraopet for recovery of Rs. 12,000/- by way of compensation for himself and on behalf of his four children consequent upon the death of his wife aged 32 years, who was an employee as a sweeper in a Panchayat Board earning a salary of Rs. 36/- per month, in an accident as a result of the negligent driving of a bus belonging to the first defendant in the suit. The second defendant who is an Insurance Company was the authorised insurer for the said vehicle. The suit was contested by the first defendant on various grounds including the liability and quantum of damages. The trial Court found that the first defendant was liable and awarded Rs. 6,000 /- as compensation taking several factors into consideration. Against the said judgment , the first defendant alone filed an appeal A. S. 68 of 1961 to this Court.Before the learned J...
The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Appanna Satyanarayana Murthi and Raja ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-07-1969
Reported in: [1970]26STC190(AP)
Parthasarathi, J.1. All these appeals raise identical questions and arise out of suits by certain dealers in copra for refund of moneys specified in their respective plaints. The case that is put forward by the plaintiffs is that they are dealers registered under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and carry on business in copra. They had been assessed on the turnover of purchases relating to copra for the year 1957-58 as also for the subsequent years. At the time of the assessment, the provisions of the Act provided for separate levy of sales tax on coconuts and copra as two distinct commodities. Subsequently, the provisions of the Act had been amended by Act 26 of 1961 by deleting copra from out of the commodities that are assessable under the Third Schedule. The amending Act introduced an explanation providing for an inclusive definition of the word 'coconut' so as to comprehend copra as well. This provision of the amending Act was made retrospective with effect from 15th June,...
Namarugunulla Gopal Rao Vs. Maruthi Rao Gongothi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP204
Gopal Tao Ekbote, J.1. This is a revision, petition filed by the defendant against an order made by the First additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad on 27-1-1966 whereby the learned Judge declined to transfer the case to the Special Court.2. The necessary facts are that the respondent instituted O. S. No. 83 of 1965 in October 1965 before the lower Court on the foot of a mortgage for recovery of a sum of Rs. 15,383. The mortgage deed was executed on 16th October, 1959. It relates to a house bearing No. 1-7-176 situated at Bakara, Mushirabad in Hyderabad City.3. The defendant-petitioner filed I. A. No. 883 of 1965 requesting the Court to transfer the case under Section 19(1) of the Hyderabad Agricultural Debtors' Relief Act (XVI of 1956) hereinafter called 'the Act', to the special Court constituted under the Act, as he is a debtor.4. This application was resisted by the plaintiff mainly on the ground that the petitioner is not a debtor and as the suit has been filed after the no...
Syed Jaferuklah Jaferi Vs. Abdul Aziz and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP13; 1970CriLJ26
Chinnappa Reddy, J. 1. This case has been placed before us to consider whether Crl. R. C. No. 441 of 1964 (AP) was rightly decided by a learned Single Judge of this Court.2. The facts of the present case are as follows:The petitioner filed a complaint before the 8th City Magistrate against respondents 2 to 8 for alleged offences under Sections 448, 454, 341, 295-A and 426, I. P. C. and against respondent No. 1 for abetment of those offences. The first respondent is the Secretary of the Wakf Board, appointed by the State Government under the provisions of Section 21 of the Wakfs Act , 1954. The Wakf Board is a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal, established by the State Government under Section 9 of the Wakfs Act. Respondents 2 to 5 are stated to be employees of the Wakf Board while respondents 6 to 8 are not stated to have any official status. it is alleged in the complaint that under the instruction of respondent 1, respondents 2 to 8 invaded premises No. 17-...
Vrandavanla Goverdhanlal Pitti and anr. Vs. Kamala Bai Goverdhanlal an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-01-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP109
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, C.J.1. The Office Note in S. R. No. 34717 of 1967 had initially sought orders on the questions (1) whether the O-P. was maintainable in view of the fact that the petitioners seek probate fro a part of the property left by the deceased and not for the entire estate? (2) Whether the Advocates for the petitioners may be directed to file an English translation of the will by a competent authority duly verified as laid down by S. 277 of the Indian Succession Act, (3) Whether the advocate may be directed to file a valuation of the estate of the deceased ink duplicate as per Section 52 of the Court Fees Act and mention the Court Fee payable thereon. Our learned brother, Narasimham, J., directed that the probate fee should be levied under the proviso to Section 53(2) of the Andhra pradesh Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 in respect of immoveable properties situated at Bombay for which probate is compulsory under Section 57(b) of the Indian Succession Act and that a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›