Andhra Pradesh Court January 1977 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.
Gollamudi Siva Kumari and ors. Vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Guntur and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP37
Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. Defendants 1, 2 and 6 in O. S. No. 150/1970 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Guntur, are the appellants in this appeal. The plaintiff-1st respondent, Indian Overseas Bank, laid the suit for recovery of Rs. 70,046-70 ps. due under a mortgage.2. The case of the plaintiff is as follows: The 1st defendant is the wife of one late Gollamudi Madana Mohana Rao, and 2nd defendant is the son, the 6th defendant is the daughter, the 3rd defendant is the mother and the 4th defendant is his brother. Madana Mohana Rao approached the plaintiff-Bank for a cash credit facility of Rs. 65,000/- for making additions and improvements to his hotel building 'Durga Bhavan' situated in the 3rd line, Brodipet, Guntur-2. The loan was sanctioned on 8-10-1969 and the same was repayable in monthly instalments of Rs. 1,500/-, commencing from the month of March, 1970. Defendants 4 and 5 stood as sureties. Madana Mohana Rao executed promissory notes on 8-10-1969 for a sum of Rs. 65,...
income-tax Officer, a Ward and anr. Vs. Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR393(AP)
B.J. Divan, C.J. 1. The writ appeal arises out of W.P. No. 2557 of 1974. Both the writ appeal and Writ Petition No. 1541 of 1975 relate tothe same assessee and the same question arises in both the cases and hence we will dispose of both of them by this common judgment. 2. Writ Appeal No. 410 of 1976 arises out of assessment year 1965-66, whereas Writ Petition No. 1541 of 1975 arises out of assessment year 1966-67. In each of these matters, the department has sought to reopen the assessments for the relevant years, i.e., assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67, respectively, by issuing notices under Sections 147 and 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In each of these matters, the notices have been challenged by the assessee on the ground that the Income-tax Officer concerned has no jurisdiction to issue the notices, since the circumstances justifying the exercise of the power under these Sections do not exist in the instant case. 3. The assessee in each of these matters is a limited company ...
V. Veena Raghavallo and ors. Vs. State Through S.P.E. Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ209
ORDERChennakesav Reddy, J.1. The question that arises in this petition filed Under Section 482, Cr.PC by the accused in Sessions Case 4& of 1976 on the file of the Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, is whether the order of committal of the accused by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, Under Section 323, I. P. C, read with Section 209; Cre P. C. is without jurisdiction,2. The Inspector of C.B.I., S. P.E., Hyderabad, files a charge-sheet against the accused for the alleged offences Under Sections 120B/420, 471/467, 471/460, 420 & 472, IPC The charges were framed after examination of the accused and hearing or required Under Section 240, Cr. P. C A-l was charged Under Sections 120-B/420, 471/461, 471/460, 420 and 472, I.P.C. Charges against A-2 were framed Under Sections 120-B/420 and 419, IPC The charges framed against A-3 were Under Sections 120-B/420, 419 and 471/468, IPC It is unnecessary for the purpose of this case to refer to the charges framed against A-4, a...
income-tax Officer, J-ward Vs. Khalid Mehdi Khan (Minor) (Represented ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-1977
Reported in: [1977]110ITR79(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. These two writ petitions filed by the Income-tax Officer raise a common question for our consideration and can be disposed of together. It is sufficient if we state the facts in W. P. No. 1440/1976. 2. In respect of the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73 the respondent-assessee filed returns of his income showing the receipt of certain amountstowards his l/5th share in the lease amount in respect of Skyline Theatre building, furniture, fittings and machinery. The said return was accepted by the Income-tax Officer. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax, in exercise of his powers under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, revised the order of assessment and directed the Income-tax Officer to reassess the same according to law. Under the said order dated February 27, 1976, the Commissioner of Income-tax expressed his prima facie opinion that the lease income from the said theatre should be assessed in the hands of the association of persons comprising of the responde...
B. Krishna Murthy Vs. the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kurnool and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP249
Sambasiva Rao, J.1. The question that arises for decision in the writ petition is whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act 1961. Section 6 of the Act was repealed by the 1973 Land Reforms Act. Section 30 of the latter Act is to the effect that where any land has been taken over on payment of compensation under the 1961 Act, the proceeding shall be continued in respect of such land under that act. It is stated before us by both sides that all the proceedings relating to the surrender of the Land, acceptance of it, determination of compensation and deposit of compensation had been completed. The State has preferred appeals against the quantum of compensation. Therefore as laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in W. As. Nos. 776 and 767 of 1975 on 23rd October 1975 (Andh Pra), the provisions of the proviso to Section 30(1) of the 1973 Act apply to the land surrendered by the peti...
Rama Naidu Vs. Ramadas Naidu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP283
Sambasiva Rao, J.1. This case demonstrates in a very telling manner how a decision changes the course of law as it had obtained, which affects the course of litigation and the rights and liabilities of the parties. The difficulty in this case which we shall presently refer to, arises on account of the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Muttayya v. Gopala Krishnayya, : AIR1974AP85 .2. The matter arose in the following manner. An extent of about 15 acres of land is in R. S. No. 160 in Edavanivaripalli, hamlet of Nelakuntla Village. It formed part of the erstwhile Zamindari of Bangarupalayam. The writ petitioner filed an application before the Assistant Settlement Officer for ryotwari patta in respect of this land of 15 acres. He purported to file it under Section 56(1) of the Estates Abolition Act. In the petition he alleged that the land was his ancestral property for which the erstwhile Zamindar granted a patta in favour of his father in the year 1942. But at the time of surve...
P.M. Doraswamy Reddy Vs. the Election Authority and Director of Market ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP286
B.J. Divan, C.J. 1. This writ appeal is preferred by the original petition against the judgment and order of our learned brother, Gangadhara Rao, J. in Writ Petition No. 840 of 1975. In this judgment, we will refer to the appellants as the original petitioner and the respondents according to their array in the original petition.2. The facts giving rise to this litigation are as follows: Election for the Agricultural Market Committee, Chittoor was held on August, 5, 1974. Seven persons contested the election. Two of the candidates got 138 and 131 votes and they were declared as duly elected. The petitioner, the 3rd respondent and one S. Srinivasulu Chetty got 96 votes each. Thereafter as provided by the relevant rules, lots were drawn and the petitioner was declared elected as a result of the drawing of the lots. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent filed an election petition before the Election Tribunal set up under the relevant rules and the petition was allowed. In the election petition, i...
Marakula Agamma and ors. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-21-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ709
ORDERPunnayya, J.1. Sri Raghava Rao, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, seeks for quashing of the order passed by the IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad in C. C. No. 2593 of 1974 committing the accused to the Court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge for taking his trial.2. The petitioners are A-l to A-4 in C. C. No. 2593 of 1974. According to the prosecution, the petitioners and another who is the 5th accused were alleged to have committed offences punishable Under Sections 120-B. 420, 466, 468 and 471, I. P. C, and charges were framed on 11-10-1974 to that effect. In the trial, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses by 25-10-1976 out of 25 witnesses cited to be examined and all the witnesses were cross-examined. At this stage, the learned Magistrate felt that as the amount involved in the case was Rs. 6,38,822-39 and as highest punishment has to be imposed if the accused were to be convicted and also as the case requires speedy disposal, the case has to be committed to the Session...
Makkala Narsimlu Vs. Gunnala Raghunandan Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP374
Sambasiva Rao, J. 1. The principal question raised in this Letters Patent Appeal is about the compensation awarded by our learned brother Sriramulu, j., for failure to perform a contract. The defendant, against whom the compensation was awarded by our learned brother, has preferred this appeal.2. The matter arose thus :- The appellants executed an agreement of sale Ex. A-1 dated 29-3-66 in favour of the respondent agreeing to sell a house for Rs. 20,000. A sum of Rs. 4,000 was paid on that date by way of advance or earnest money. The vendor agreed to get two things done within nine months there from. Once is to get a further sale deed in his favour from whom he had purchased. The second condition was that he would vacate the tenants from the house and give vacant possession to the purchaser within the period of nine months. That was why the parties fixed he period of nine months for performance of the contract. Once the vendor was ready with these two requirements, the purchaser was to...
Nandipati Somireddy and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP377
ORDER1. The petitioners are challenging in this petition the acquisition Survey Nos. 710/1, 710/2 and 710/4 admeasuring Ac. 1-95 cents for the purpose of constructing an electric sub-station. The acquisition has been made at the instance of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 4-3-1976. The notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 20-5-76 was published on 3-6-1976.2. Mr. R. Venugopala Reddy who appears for the petitioners has raised before me three contentions. Firstly he has contended that the substance of the notification issued under Section 4 was not published at convenient places in the locality. The second contention which he has raised is that about six years ago land bearing Survey No. 109 had been acquired for constructing this very sub-station and that proposal was dropped. Now this land is sought to be acquired by invoking the provisions of Sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisi...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »