Andhra Pradesh Court February 1972 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.
G. Lakshminarayana Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-25-1972
Reported in: [1974]33STC558(AP)
Vaidya, J.1. The firm M/s. Lakshminarayana Rice Mill, Shamsergunj, Hyderabad, was carrying on business of rice milling and the petitioner and one Raja Reddy were partners. The firm was dissolved in the year 1959 and the sales tax authorities, with whom the firm was registered, were informed accordingly. For the year 1959-60, the firm was assessed as per order No. 1008/59/60 dated 30th March, 1962. The turnover was determined at Rs. 3,46,992.14 and the total tax was fixed at Rs. 13,879.12. By the time of the assessment an advance tax of Rs. 6,512.57 was paid by the assessee as demanded by the sales tax authorities. The petitioner aggrieved by the assessment order, filed an appeal to the appellate authority being Appeal No. 267 of 1962-63. The appellate authority by its order dated 14th September, 1962, allowed the appeal and remanded the case for fresh disposal after setting aside the assessment order. No action had been taken by the assessing authority. After a lapse of four years the ...
Gone Rajasimha Rao and ors. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1972
Reported in: AIR1973AP236
Vaidya, J.1. Writ Petition No. 347/71 is filed by five petitioners three being the properties of Albaka and Cherla estates and petitioners 4 and 5 being the properties of Sarangapani and Dandupeta free-hold villages. These petitioners challenge the validity of Andhra Pradesh Mahals ( Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari ) Regulation, 1969, ( hereinafter referred to as the Mahals Regulation ). The petitioners in writ petition No. 357/71 are the Muttadars of certain Muttas in Yellavaram taluk of East Godavari District. The 24 petitioners in Writ Petition No. 358 of 1971 are also Muttadars of different villages in Ramapachodavaram taluk East Godavari District, whereas the petitioner in writ petition No. 1200 of 1971 is a muttadar of six villages in Yellavaram taluk of East Godavari District. The Muttadars aforementioned have challenged the validity of the Andhra Pradesh Muttas ( Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari ) Regulation of 1969 ( hereinafter referred to as the Muttas Regulatio...
Kudapa Subbana Vs. Chitturi Gandhi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-23-1972
Reported in: AIR1972AP261
Krishna Rao, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of India under Art. 133 of the Constitution from our order in Civil Revision Petition No. 122 of 1970.2. A few facts which gave rise to the civil revision petition before us may be stated. O. S. 4 of 1965 was filed by the present petitioner for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,08,900/- being the past mesne profits due for the period 1941, to 1951. The petitioner, who was the plaintiff, invoked the aid of Section 14 of the Limitation Act to bring the suit within time. The trail Court framed an additional issue which read as follows:---'Whether the plaintiff is entitled in law to the benefit of Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act and claim deduction of the period from 31-7-1940 to 18-12-1944 in computing the period of limitation prescribed for the suit.'3. This was tried as a preliminary issue by consent of parties. The trial Court held that issue in favour of the plaintiff. The aggrieved defendants preferred...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. Vandanam Venkata Pulla Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ121
ORDERA.D.V. Reddy, J.This Appeal is by the State against the acquittal of the accused in C.C. No. 26/67 on the file of Addl. Munsif Magistrate, Narasaraopet. on a charge under Sections 16(1) and 7 read with Section 2(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rule 44(a) of the Rules framed thereunder.2. The accused is a licensed wholesale dealer in Narasaraopet town having a shop at 13.1.186 on Vinukonda road, dealing in oils, food grains, dhall, flours, etc. On 18.11.1966 at about 10 A.M.. P. W. 1 the Food Inspector along with his Sanitary Maistry P. W. 3 and some others including P. W. 2 inspected the shop of the accused and found a bag containing four maunds of flour exposed for sale along with other food stuffs and on being questioned the accused stated that it was peas flour and thereupon P. W. 1 the Food Inspector served a notice on him and purchased from him 600 grams of peas flour and paid 0.70 paise and obtained a receipt. Thereafter he divided the flour into three p...
Mannem Borramma Vs. Mannem Rukminamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1972
Reported in: AIR1973AP98
ORDER1. This is a petition for refund of the court-fees paid on the memorandum of cross-objections filed in A.S.No. 20/70 on the ground that the main appeal itself has been withdrawn.2. It is now well settled that this Court has no power to order refund of court-fees in cases which are outside the purview of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act. The grounds mentioned in the affidavit do not come within the ambit of the provisions of Section 63 of the Court-fees Act. The inherent powers which this court can exercise under Section 151. Civil P.C., in respect of refund of Court-fees are strictly limited to such of the case as mentioned in Inre Chidambaram Chettiar. AIR 1934 Mad 566. The Court can order refund of Court - fees under Section 151, Civil P.C., where there has been an excess payment made by mistake or where on account of the mistake of the Court, a party has been compelled to pay Court -fees either fully or in part. A part from these instances...
The Central Warehousing Corporation Vs. Central Bank of India Ltd. and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1972
Reported in: AIR1974AP8
Kondaiah, J.1. This appeal by the Central Warehousing Corporation, the 2nd defendant, is directed against the judgment and decree, passed against it and in favour of the Central Bank of India in O.S. No. 14 of 1966 by the Chief Judge. City Civil Court, Hyderabad at Secundrabad for the recovery of a sum, of Rs. 54,311-13 p. with interest at 6 % from 1-7-1966.2. The Central Bank of India Ltd., the 1st respondent herein, claimed the suit amount against the 1st defendant. Gali Krishnamurthi who borrowed certain sums of money on cash Credit Kev Loan Account. The 1st defendant has edorsed several warehouse receipts including Exs.A. 53 and A. 54 obtained by him from the appellant. The claim of the plaintiff against the 1st defendant is in respect of the sums borrowed by him from the bank and in so far as the 2nd defendant is concerned, the plaintiff's claim is based on the receipts Exs. A. 53 and A, 54 given by the Warehouseman to the 1st defendant. The right to claim the value of the goods c...
B. Jangi Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-1972
Reported in: AIR1972AP307
Ramachandra Rao, J.1. In this Writ appeal against the judgment of our learned brother Krishna Rao, J., in W. P. No. 127./72 a short question arises as to the interpretation of the expression 'total number of members of the Panchayat Samithi' occurring in Section 33 (12) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Samithis and Zilla Parishads Act, 1959, hereinafter referred to as the Act.2. The appellants who filed the said Writ Petitions the President of the Panchayat Samithi. Nagarkurnool, Mahaboobnagar District, which had a strength of 45 members. A notice of no-confidence motion was issued on 7-12-1971 by 27 members and at the meeting held on 31-12-1971. 26 members supported the no-confidence motion and it was declared carried by the Revenue Divisional Officer. By 31-12-1971 when the no-confidence motion was considered. four members had become disqualified or had ceased to be Sarpanchas on account of no-confidence motions being passed against them, thereby reducing the effective strength of the...
Maganti Ramachandra Rao and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-1972
Reported in: [1974]95ITR147(AP)
Parthasarathi, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari for quashing the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax made on February 23, 1970.2. The facts that have given rise to the writ petition may briefly be stated. The petitioner, a partnership, was assessed in respect of the income for the year ended December 31, 1957, by the order dated August 22, 1959. The income on foot of which the petitioner was taxed was determined at Rs. 46,254. The assessment was reopened by the Income-tax Officer who came to the conclusion that the assessee should be taxed in respect of a further sum of Rs. 50,000. The order of revised assessment was made on July 23, 1963. There was an appeal preferred by the assessee, the result of which was that he has succeeded in part and the addition to the income was determined at Rs. 24,500. The order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was made on February 28, 1967.3. It may be mentioned that the sum of Rs. 24,5...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. Doredla Ramayya and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ506
A.D.V. Reddy, J.1. This Appeal is by the State against the acquittal of the accused of the charge under Section 16(1)(b) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. hereinafter referred to as the 'Act.'2. A-1 and A-2 are partners in a business dealing in foodgrains like turmeric, jaggery pulses, flours and oils at door No. 10-1-172 on Vinukonda road in Narasaraopet. The case for the prosecution is that on 16.5.67 at about 9 a.m. P.W. 1. The Food Inspector Narasaraopet Municipality along with his Maistry P.W. 2. went to the shop of the accused and found two bass of turmeric powder kept in the shop for purposes of sale P.W. 1 demanded A-1 to give sample of turmeric from one of the bags for purposes of analysis but A-1 refused and when A-2 was asked he also refused. Then P.W. 1 told them that such refusal is wrongful under the provisions of the Act. A-1 asked A-2 to lock the shop and after A-2 had done so both of them went away. P. Ws. 1 and 2 waited there for some time and when the accus...
Ramakrishna Reddi and anr. Vs. P. Dasa Muni Reddi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-14-1972
Reported in: AIR1973AP33
1. The plaintiffs in O. S. No. 124 of 1969 of the file of the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Chittoor are the appellants in this appeal. The suit was laid to recover a sum of Rs. 10,776 /- due on a promissory note dated 1-9-1962 for a sum of Rs. 7,000 /- executed by the two defendants. Ex. A-1 is the suit promissory note and it is signed by the defendants. It contains endorsements Exs. A-2 to A-8. Ex. A-2 is dated 1-3-1963 and it is signed by the first defendant. It shows that a sum of Rs. 420 /- was paid that day towards interest due under the promissory note. Ex. A-3 is dated 1-7-1963. It is again signed by the first defendant and it shows that a sum of Rs. 280 /- was paid towards interest due under the promissory note. Ex. A-4 is another endorsement dated 1-12-1963 and made by the first defendant himself and it shows that a sum of Rs. 350 /- was paid towards interest due under the promissory note. Ex. A-5 is an endorsement dated 1-4-1064 signed by both the defendants and...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »