Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Tadepalli Ram Rathnam Vs. Kantheti Varadarajulu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP246
1. This appeal raises a short but important question and is directed against the judgment of the District Judge, Machilipatnam given on 27th March, 1967.2. The short facts relevant for the purpose of this appeal are that the plaintiff and defendants 4 to 7 are the daughters of one K. Venkatakrishnaiah, a resident of Vijayawada. Defendants 1 to 3 are his sons and the 8th defendant is his wife. Venkatakrishnaiah was the owner of the immovable property described in the plaint schedule which was his self acquired property. Venkatakrishnaiah was seen for the last time in the last week of December, 1955. From then he was not heard of by those who ought to know about him. The plaintiff claimed 1/9th share in the plaint schedule property on the ground that Venkatakrishnaiah would be presumed to have died either at the end of seven years form the date when he was last seen as he was not heard of for over seven years since then or in any case on the date of the suit, and consequently she is enti...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. Shaik Valli and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-1969
Reported in: 1971CriLJ1229
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. In these two Criminal Revision Cases we are concerned with 'young persons', 'children', and 'youthful offenders' as denned in Sections 3 (2) and 3 (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Children Act. 'Young person'' is defined as meaning 'a person who is fourteen years of age or upwards and under the age of sixteen years, 'Child' is defined as meaning 'a person under the age of fourteen years.' 'Youthful offender' is denned as meaning 'a person who has been convicted of an offence punishable with transportation or imprisonment and who at the time of such 'conviction was under the age of sixteen years.' Transportation is no longer a punishment which may be imposed under the Criminal Law of India and 'transportation for life' which was one of the punishments specified in Section 53 of the Indian Penal Code was replaced by 'Imprisonment for life' by the Amending Act of 1955. Section 53-A of the Penal Code, now, further states that any reference to 'transportation' in any other la...
Chitturi Perraju and anr. Vs. Yednapudi Venkamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-21-1969
Reported in: AIR1971AP74
Sambasiva Rao, J. 1. This batch of cases provides a classical illustration of abuse of processes of Court. They arise in execution. The suit was filed in the year 1941 and a decree therein was passed in 1942. Though nearly 27 long years have gone by, the curtain is not yet drawn on the litigation and the parties still continue to be at loggerheads. The parties have taken recourse to every available and conceivable stratagem in fighting each other with the result that they have not reached the stage of finality of that dispute.2. The properties which are the subject-matter of the execution and the others, originally belonged to the second defendant in O. S. 674/41 D. M. C. Bandar. On 6-3-1937 he executed Ex. P-1, a settlement deed in favour of his wife. the first defendant, in respect of nearly Ac. 21-69 cents. The first defendant. in her turn, executed Ex. P-2 another settlement deed on 5-8-1939, conveying about Ac. 7-35 cents to the plaintiffs who are her daughter's sons and another e...
Mohammad Ali Vs. Fareedunnisa Begam and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP298
1. The main question that arises for consideration in this Second appeal is whether in fact the 1st plaintiff was divorced by her husband as alleged by him in his notices Ex. A. 3 dated 12-5-1960 addressed to Sri Md. Osman and Ex. A. 6 dated 16-7-1960 addressed to Sri Abdul Waheed Ovasi.2. To appreciate the point involved, whether the divorce of the 1st plaintiff by her husband the defendant takes effect from the date of the notice at least, in view of the denial by the wife (1st plaintiff) that she was never divorced as alleged in the notices on the night of the Nikah, it is necessary to state the relevant facts. The 1st plaintiff was married to the defendant (appellant) on 17-5-50 and the prompt dower fixed at Rs. 50/- was paid then and there at the time of the marriage. It is her case that her husband consummated the marriage and that a son (2nd plaintiff) was born to them on 31-3-60 and that subsequently the defendant neglected her and their son and refused to maintain them and the...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S. Krishna Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1969
Reported in: [1970]76ITR664(AP)
Gopal Rao Ekbote, J. 1. This is a reference made under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and the question which we are called upon to consider is:'Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the sum of Rs. 5,160 which was incurred by the assessee on his foreign tour was an allowable expenditure under Section 10(2)(xv) of the Indan Income-tax Act ?'2. The relevant facts are that the respondent is a Hindu undivided family of which Shri S. Krishna Rao is the manager. The joint Hindu family owns a printing press know as the 'Citizen Press' at Secunderabad. During the accounting year, which ended on the 30th of June, 1960 the assessee representing the Andhra Pradesh Printers' Association attended atAmsterdam the International Printers' Conference. Apart from attending the International Printers' Conference at Amsterdam, the assessee, Krishna Rao, at that place saw the connected exhibition of printing equipment and machinery and also sought acquaintance with the tec...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jeskaran Bhuvalka
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-14-1969
Reported in: [1970]76ITR128(AP)
Sambasiva Rao, J.1. The assessee is a member of the family of Bhuwalkas hailing from Ratnaghar in the former State of Bikaner, now in Rajasthan. As a young man of 19 or 20 years, he came to Guntur in 1941 in the wake of his father who had already come there to participate in the management of Bhajarang Jute Mills Ltd., Guntur. To start with, he learnt some work and after some time he also joined the jute mill as an employee. For the first time, he was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 191-1-45, For that year, the items of income were few and limited, his salary being Rs. 3,345 and the interest accrued to him being Rs. 103. From October 28, 1943, however, he started his own independent business in gunnys, groundnut oil, etc. For the assessment year 1945,46, ho filed a return of income on July 19, 1945, consisting of salary of Rs. 3,737 and showing loss from business of Rs. 2,831. On March 26, 1946, however, he filed returns for the earlier assessment years 1941-42 to 1944-4...
The Motor Workers Union Vs. Rayapwaddi Apparao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP220
Sambasiva Rao, J. 1. This Writ Apeal is directed against the order of Gopalakrishna Nair, J. in W. P. No. 212 of 1964. The third respondent in the Writ petition is the Appellant. 2. The dispute in the appeal relates to the permit of a stage carriage MDV 1947 which was subsequently renumbered as A. P. V. 482, which belonged to the Motor Works Union of Bheemunipatnam in Visakhapatnam District, which is the third respondent appellant, one Babulal, claiming to but a member of the Union, purported to have sold the vehicle to the first respondent in the appeal (petitioner in the writ petition). The first respondent and a person by name J. V. Ramanaiah, who purported to be the Secretary of the Union filed in 1958, a joint application to the Regional Transport Authority, Visakhapatnam, for the stage carriage to the 1st respondent (the petitioner). That application was notified by the Regional Transport Authority calling for objections. The appellant Union, represented by its Secretary, K. Rama...
Sridhara Suryanarayana Vs. Medikonduru Ankamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1969
Reported in: AIR1971AP168
1. This civil miscellaneous second appeal arises out of proceedings objected to the sale of the properties in the execution petition presented on July 9, 1965 on the ground that the attachment effect earlier in a prior execution petition cannot be deemed to be subsisting. The order passed on the prior execution petition on 24th June 1960 was in these terms:'E. P. dismissed as execution is stayed.'The question, therefore, is whether, as a result of the order made on 24th June. 1960, the attachment of the property can be said to have been terminated.2. The answer depends upon the construction of the provisions of Rule 57 of Order 21. The contention urged for the appellant before me is that it is incumbent on the Court when it dismisses or adjourns a proceedings in execution to a future date to state whether the attachment continues or ceases. The later part of sub-rule (1) of R.57 applies to a case where an execution petition is terminated for the decree-holder's default. In that conting...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›