Andhra Pradesh Court June 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.
Ogeti Pedda Ranganna Vs. Zaleka Bee and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP124
1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order of the second respondent, Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in W. C. Case No. 283 of 1966 dated 2-8-1967 overruling an objection as to the maintainability of the claim for compensation before him. The first respondent herein filed the application before him. The first respondent herein filed the application before the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Andhra Pradesh under, the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Ac, being the legal representative of the deceased workmen employed under the petitioner. The petitioner herein raised an objection before the Commissioner questioning his jurisdiction to entertain the claim in view of Section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act under which a Claims Tribunal (District Judge) was specifically constituted to adjudicate upon all claims for compensation arising out of accidents involvin...
In Re: Salesm Govindappa Chetty
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP293; 1970CriLJ1058
1. In C. C. No. 57 of 1968 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mdanapali, the Food Inspector (Sanitary Inspector) of Madanapalli Municipality filed a complaint against S. Govindappa Chetty, alleging that the later exposed for sale Mysorepak and sold samples of it to the Food Inspector and that on analysis it was found to be adulterated because it was found to be adulterated because it was found to contain metanil yellow coaltar-dye and also to contain Kesari Dhall flour which was prohibited under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Act XXXVII of 1954) and the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules 1955. After full trial the learned Magistrate found that the Mysorepak was adulterated and it was containing metanil coaltar -dye and accordingly convicted him under S. 16(1)(a) (i) read with Ss. 7 and 2 (i) (j) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter called the Act). He found that the case of adulteration was not proved on the basis of Kesari Dhall flour. ...
S. Mohanlal Vs. R. Kondaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP384
Ramachandra Rao, J.1. This revision petition raises a short and interesting question as to whether the profession of an advocate comes within the meaning of the expression 'business' occurring in Section 10(3)(a) (iii) (a) and (b) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). In view of the importance of the question raise, our learned brother Obul Reddi, J., referred the matter to a Bench of two Judges and that is how the revision has come before us. We May also mention that apart form the above question arguments were advanced by the learned Counsel on other points also, inasmuch as the whole case has been referred to a Bench.2. The brief facts relevant for the purpose of the disposal of this revision may now be stated. The petitioner herein is the tenant and the respondent herein is the owner of a building bearing NO. 3119/1 situated at Rashtrapati Road in Secunderabd. In the building one room is facing the main ro...
Sri Laxmi Satyanarayana Rice Mill Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-18-1969
Reported in: [1970]25STC96(AP)
N. Kumarayya, Ag. C.J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the Appellate Tribunal, dated 21st January, 1963, whereby the Appellate Tribunal rejected the claim of the assessee that the 'test-check-cum-muster roll method' adopted by the assessing authority in arriving at the total turnover in the assessment based on best judgment is not legal.2. The assessee Sri Laxmi Satyanarayana Rice Mill a firm dealing in paddy and its by-products, barn and chittu at Kolakalur filed its return for the year 1957-58 showing a gross turnover of Rs. 1,91,907-14-6. The assessing authority found that the firm in its return failed to account for 30 bags of paddy purchased on 6th August, 1957. Further, in view of the results obtained by a 'test-check-cum-muster roll method' as regards the capacity of the mill also, it reached the conclusion that the turnover entered in the return for that year was grossly low. It, therefore, believed that the return was incomplete and incorrect and proc...
Public Prosecutor Vs. Kusanapudi Narasimha Raju
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-18-1969
Reported in: 1970CriLJ388
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal by the State against the order of acquittal of the respondent of an offence under Section 16(1) read with as. 7, 2 (i) (a) and (1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rule 44 (b) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules. The prosecution case is briefly as follows:2. On 22-8-1966 at about 7 A. M. Pw. 1 the Food Inspector of Narasapur saw the accused carrying buffalo milk in a brass pot. He called Pw. 2, a dalayat in the Court of the District Munsif, and, in his presence, purchased sample of milk from the accused paying him the price for it. He then followed the procedure prescribed by Section 11 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, divided the sample into three parts after adding preservative, put each part into a clean dry bottle, gave one bottle to the accused, sent one bottle to the Court and sent one bottle to the Public Analyst for analysis. The report of the Public Analyst showed that the sample contained 4,3 per cent o...
The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Sri Immadisetty Venkateswarlu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-17-1969
Reported in: [1970]25STC46(AP)
Kumarayya, Ag. C.J.1. This tax revision case, directed against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, passed on 14th May, 1966, raises a short point as to the competence of the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer to levy penalty in a case where the assessment was initially made by the Commercial Tax Officer.2. The assessment relates to the year 1962-63 and was completed on 30th March, 1964, by the Commercial Tax Officer, Guntur, as a result of inspection of business premises on 30th January, 1963, and. discovery of some incriminating material by the Special Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Evasions, Guntur. The Commercial Tax Officer estimated the probable suppressed turnover at Rs. 1,33,549 and made his assessment order on the total turnover for the year. But the suppressed turnover determined was reduced to Rs. 44,516 in appeal. After the appeal was disposed of, the assessment file was transferred from the office of the Commercial Tax Officer to the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, ...
In the Matter Of: District Munsif, Chittoor, Referring Officer
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-16-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP365
Kumaryya, C.J.1. This is a reference made under Section 113 of the Civil P. C. made by the District Munisif, Chittoor for opinion of this Court on the question whether the government in appointing District Munsifs to function as Controllers under the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and eviction) Control Act, 1960, has exceeded its power under that Act and whether the District Munsifs so appointed have jurisdiction to entertain any matters under the said act.2. It does not appear that any such controversy has arisen in any case pending before the said District Munsif, the determination of which became necessary fro him. The statement, at any rate, does not bear any mention to this. In fact, it dies not proceed on the basis that there is a case pending before him which involves determination of this issue. In these circumstances, the reference is unwarranted and wholly incompetent. Section 113, Civil P. C. is clear and categorical in this behalf. It reads thus;'Subject to such cond...
Konda Venkataramanamurthy and Sons Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-12-1969
Reported in: [1969]24STC428(AP)
ORDERN. Kumarayya, Ag. C.J.1. This tax revision petition directed against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, dated 16th April, 1966, raises a question as to the scope and extent of the benefit conferred by the notification in G.O. Ms. No. 1091, Revenue, dated 10th June, 1957.2. The petitioners constituting a Hindu joint family firm own oil ghanis or hand oil presses and produce and deal in oil. They also deal in rice, paddy and tamarind. They claimed exemption on the purchase of castor seed and sale of castor oil and castor cakes as they own or have interest in the two oil ghanis, wherein the oil is produced without employing electricity or any other power. But the assessing authority refused to give exemption as they were dealers in other commodities as well and further the business was not carried on by a single person but by the joint family firm. The assessee was unsuccessful in his appeal against the order of the assessing authority. In the further appeal the Appellate...
Mohd. Abdus Samad Vs. Mahboobunnisa Begum
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-11-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP210
Gopal Rao Ekbote, J.1. This revision petition arises out of an order passed by the First Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, on 23-8-1967 in I. A. No. 545 of 1967 in A.S. No. 45 of 1967.2. The necessary facts are that the respondent-plaintiff filed O.S. No. 8 of 1966 on the file of the Second Assistant Judge, City Court Hyderabad. It was alleged by her in the plaint that the defendant, her husband, had divorced her. She, therefore, sought to recover her meher, some jehza, articles or their value and also maintenance amount for the period of Iddat. The defendant, who is the petitioner before us, contested the suit. The suit was ultimately decreed on 21-12-1966. The defendant thereupon prefrred A. S. No. 45 of 1967. Along with the appeal, he filed I.A. No. 545 of 1967 under O. 41, R. 5 Civil P. C. He sought the execution of the decree to be stayed till the appeal was disposed of. This petition was resisted by the wife, who was the respondent in that appeal. Her contentio...
Paro and Co. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-10-1969
Reported in: [1970]25STC34(AP)
Kumarayya, Ag. C.J.1. In Paro and Company v. State of Anclhra Pradesh (Tribunal Appeal No. 717 of 1963 decided on 23rd January, 1965), the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal found that sugar candy and bura sugar sold by the assessees were exigible to a levy under the provisions of the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act (58 of 1957), (hereinafter called the 'Central Act') and, therefore, could not be subjected to tax under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act of 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Despite such a conclusion reached, the Tribunal remanded the case for determination of the question whether the said commodities were actually subjected to a levy of additional duties of excise under the Central Act. Aggrieved by this, the assessee has preferred T.R.C. No. 14 of 1965 contending that once the said commodities were held to be included in the term 'sugar' which was exempt from tax under the Act, the order of remand was unwarranted. In two other a...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›