Andhra Pradesh Court November 1976 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.
The Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board, Hyderabad Vs. K. Ramachand ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-1976
Reported in: AIR1977AP200
Alladi Kuppuswami, J.1. In these four revision petitions the only question for consideration is what is the Court fee payable on the plaint. Suits were filed in different Courts by different parties. But the defendant in each case is the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board. O.S. 59/71 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Hyderabad West which has given rise to C.R.P. 2157/75 is a suit for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from disconnecting the electricity service of the plaintiff. C.R.P. No. 59/76 arises out of suit O.S. 250/74 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Visakhapatnam for a declaration that a notice issued by the Assistant Engineer of the Defendant Board is illegal and for a consequential injunction restraining the defendant from disconnecting the supply of service. Similarly O.S. 1324/74 on the file of the District Munsif's Court Visakhapatnam has given rise to C.R.P. No. 49/76 which is a suit for declaring that notice of disconnection is illegal ...
Pinnika Lakshmaiah Vs. Pinnika Venkateswarlu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1976
Reported in: AIR1977AP301
Sambasiva Rao, J.1. The first respondent in the appeal has sought partition of certain properties into three shares and possession of one such share. The lower Court decreed the suit in part. The second defendant has filed this appeal. The plaintiff - first respondent however has filed neither a cross-appeal nor cross-objections.2. The properties, of which partition was sought are described in three schedules. In Sch. A, lands are enumerated in Sch. B cattle and paddy, and in schedule C outstandings.3. The plaintiff (respondent No. 1) has stated his case in the plaint as follows: His father was Pedaveerayya. Padeveerayya and defendants 1 and 2 were brothers. Originally, the father of the three brothers, Pitchaiah was managing the joint family properties. After Pitchaiah's demise the plaintiff's father Pedaveerayya became the Kartha. When Pedaveerayya died, the first defendant succeeded to the management. When these properties were being managed jointly some other properties were purcha...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dr. S. Roopkaran
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1976
Reported in: [1985]154ITR717(AP)
Divan, C.J. 1. The two questions which are sought to be referred to the High Court arise in connection with the capital gains which the assessee is said to have earned in the year of assessment. It is clear on the facts of the case as set out by the Tribunal that the assessee exchanged his immovable property for the shares floated by the transferee-company. In order to find out what the amount of capital gains was, the Tribunal had to ascertain the basic worth of the shares and the Tribunal has valued those shares in the light of well-known principles of accountancy regarding the valuation of the shares of a private limited company. It cannot be said that the Tribunal has adopted any wrong principles or has erred in law in arriving at the conclusions regarding the valuation of the shares. Hence, questions Nos. 1 and 2 which turn upon the question of capital gains cannot be said to arise as questions of law out of the order of the Tribunal. As regards question No. 3, since the question ...
Eastern Typewriter Service Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1976
Reported in: [1978]42STC18(AP)
B.J. Divan, C. J.1. The assessee in both these revision cases is the same and it is a proprietary concern. The question arising in connection with two different assessments is the same question in both these cases. Hence, we will dispose of these two matters by this common judgment.2. The assessee entered into an agreement with the Director of Printing, Stationery and Stores Purchase Department (Stationery Wing), Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in 1968 to carry out repairs to typewriters, duplicators, calculators and comptometers of all patterns belonging to Government, agreeing to take up repairs and servicing of the typewriters, duplicators, etc., at the rates approved by the Government of India through the Director General of Supplies and Disposals, New Delhi. Under condition 6 of the agreement, the rates for spares were to be allowed as per the rates approved by the Government of India through the Director General of Supplies and Disposals, New Delhi. The quarterly servicing and minor r...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. J. Murlidhar
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ1634
Muktadar, J.1. The Food Inspector, Circle No. 11, Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad, filed a complaint against the accused on 25-8-1975 alleging that the accused has contravened the provisions of Section 7 read with Section 2(1)(a) and Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Food Inspector visited the shop of the accused on 10-2-1975. After complying with the formalities prescribed in the Rules framed under the Act, he purchased 375 grams of Groundnut Oil for Rs. 8-15 p. He divided the Oil into three equal parts and put them in three empty, dry and clean bottles, corked them, and affixed his seal. He gave one sample to the accused, and sent another to the Public Analyst while retaining the third with himself. The Public Analyst in his report dated 22-3-1975 came to the conclusion that the sample contained about 7 per cent of Castor Oil and was, therefore, adulterated, It is not known as to when exactly the report was recei...
Divvi Suryanarayana Murthy Vs. Competent Authority, Inspecting Assista ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-05-1976
Reported in: [1979]117ITR278(AP)
Muktadar, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated July 28, 1975 of Chinnappa Reddy J. in W.P. No. 3928/73 [reported in : [1976]102ITR19(AP) ] dismissing the same. The facts are these :One M. Linga Raju and Narasimha Raju were the owners of Saras-wathi Picture Palace situated in the village called Malkipuram, East Godavari District. They executed a sale deed on October 28, 1972, in favour of the appellant conveying the cinema theatre for a consideration of Rs. 1,10,000. The said deed was presented for registration to the concerned registering authority. The Sub-Registrar of Malkipuram Village called upon the vendors to obtain a clearance certificate from the income-tax authorities under Section 230A of the I.T. Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The vendors obtained the tax clearance certificate on November 16, 1972, and having produced the same before the registering authority got the sale deed registered on November 16, 1972. Chapter XX-A was introduced ...
The Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India Limited Vs. Deput ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-05-1976
Reported in: [1978]42STC372(AP)
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. The petitioner in each of these six matters is the same, viz., the Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India Limited, Visakhapatnam. All these six matters relate to different assessment years for purposes of sales tax. The question arises in connection with the export of iron ore and manganese ore effected by the petitioner in each of these matters to foreign countries and the question is whether, in respect of the purchases and sales in connection with such exports, any sales tax is payable or not. W. P. No. 472 of 1976 relates to the assessment year 1956-57. W. P. No. 473 of 1976 relates to the assessment year 1957-58. W. P. No. 750 of 1976 relates to the assessment year 1968-69. W. P. No. 752 of 1976 relates to the assessment year 1967-68. C. R. P. No. 587 of 1976 relates to the assessment year 1969-70 and C. R. P. No. 832 of 1976 relates to the assessment year 1970-71.2. Under Section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act (74 of 1956), exemption is given from pay...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›