Andhra Pradesh Court July 1970 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.
R. Rukmaji Rao Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-07-1970
Reported in: AIR1971AP114
ORDER1. This revision petition gives rise to an important question relating to court-fees whether court-fees is payable on the memorandum of compromise in a suit for declaration of title and of recovery of possession of immovable property, whereunder the defendants is entitled for payment of certain sums of money from the plaintiff.2. The material fats may briefly be sated; In art performance of an agreement of sale dated June 18, 1959 executed by the second respondent in respect of Amar Talkies, Hyderabad ownered by him for a sum of Rs. 1,75,000/- the petitioner and the third respondent the vendees were put in possession of the talkies. The vendor had received various sums of money towards sale consideration from the petitioner. In the year 1954 the third respondent had relinquished his interest in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner was therefore in sole and exclusive possession and enjoyment of Amar Talkies. Hyderabad till disputes arose between the parties in the year 1958 reg...
Gogireddy Sambireddy Vs. Gogireddy Jayamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-07-1970
Reported in: AIR1972AP156
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. A Hindu wife aggrieved by her husband's conduct in marrying a second wife laid a complaint against him for an offence under Section 494, I. P. C. , read with Sections 11 and 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. In this application under Section 561-A, Criminal P. C. the husband seeks to have the proceedings against him quashed on the ground that Sections 11 and 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act are ultra vires and unconstitutional as they offend Article 15(1) of the Constitution. We may at once state that though the Act has been on the statute book for fifteen years no one thought worth while all these years to challenge the vires of these provisions either in this court or elsewhere. It has not fallen to this petitioner to question the vires of these provisions.2. Sri P. A. Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that while the personal law of the Hindus prior to 1955 and the personal law of the Muslims always permitted polygamy, the Hindu Marriage Act mad...
D. Balakrishnamurthy and ors. Vs. Manasani Veeranarassaiah Alias
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-06-1970
Reported in: AIR1971AP251
ORDER1. In Rent Control Case No.577 of 1963 on the file of the Rent Controller. Sucunderabad. an application for the eviction of the tenant under Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction Control) Act. 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act)' was granted. The order of eviction relates to the non-residential premises bearing Door Nos. 87-B-1 and 87-A situate at Sarojinidevi Road, Secunderabad. The Landlords petitioners based their application for eviction on the allegation, of wilful default in payment of rent, submission of the landlords. and the user of with the purpose of the lease. The tenant, who was the sole respondent in the application,. raised several pleas in his answer to the petition. He denied that there was a sub-lease and asserted that he himself was carrying on business in the premises in the name and style of 'Rio Cafe' and that the alleged sub-tenant was no other than his agent who was assisting him in the business. It was also stated that ...
Kanneganti Venkata Subbayya (Died) and ors. Vs. P. Ranga Rao Tobacco C ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-03-1970
Reported in: AIR1972AP72
ORDER1. This revision petition arises out of a suit brought by an assignee of a promissory note. The defendants 2 and 3 were carrying on business in partnership in the name and style of 'Sri Ranga Rao Tabacco Co.' The partnership firm is cited as the 1st defendant. The 2nd defendant incurred a liability on behalf of the partnership firm and executed a promissory note for the price payable by the firm on account of goods supplied by the 4th defendant. The promissory note in favour of the 4th defendant bears the date 27-8-1964. The note was subsequently assigned by the 4th defendant to the plaintiff for due consideration on 4-12-1964. Four days later, on 8-12-1964, the plaintiff got a registered notice issued calling upon the maker of the promissory note to pay the amount due thereon. Thereupon, the plaintiff, gave notice of dishonour to the 4th defendant as per Ex. B-5 dated 18-12-1964. Nearly four months later, the 4th defendant replied to the notice under Ex. B-6 repudiating his liabi...
Nandigama Venkata Krishna Rao Vs. Mullpudi Ganeswara Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-03-1970
Reported in: AIR1971AP246
1. This appeal, which arises out of execution proceedings is directed against the judgment in A. S. No. 3/68 on the file of the District Judge. West Godavari. The decree-holder is the appellant.2. The appellant filed O. S.No. 153/55 against the respondent for recovery of money in the Court of the District Munsif. Tanuku. During the pendency of that suit, he got some immovable properties attached before judgment as belonging to the respondent. The father of the respondent intervened with a claim regarding item 1 of the attached property alleging that it had fallen to his share at a family partition with his son. That claim having been rejected, he filed O. S. 11/57 under Order 21 Rule 63 C. P. C. and obtained an injunction on 21-5-1957 restraining the decree-holder from proceeding with execution against item 1 of the attached property pending disposal of the suit. That suit was decreed on 13-8-1959. The decree-holder carried the matter in appeal to the District Court in vain and the sec...
Nooney Kondiah Vs. Nayudu Ramanareddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-1970
Reported in: AIR1971AP142
ORDER1. The question raised in this revision petition relates to the valuation of the suit and the court-fee payable by the plaintiff.2. The suit was laid for the grant of an injunction. The question whether the plaintiff has properly valued the suit and the adequacy of the court-fee paid by him, came up for consideration before the District Munsif on the basis of a check slip placed before the Court. The learned District Munsif came to the conclusion that there is a denial off the title by the defendant and consequently the suit has to be valued under clause (a) of Section 26 of the Andhra Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the half of the market value of the property. The learned District Munsif observed inter alia that 'in the light of the above allegations in the written statement it is clear that the plaintiff's title to the suit property is clearly denied by the defendant. the relief sought by the plaintiff relates too immovable property. I...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›