Andhra Pradesh Court February 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.
Poosarla Achuta Rao and ors. Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP237
Ramachandra Raju, J. 1. This second appeal arises out of a suit filed for declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled to have the lease and licence in respect of the plaint schedule property (some salt pans) as the legatees under a will executed by one Motamarri Chinna Mahalakshmamma and for the transfer of the said lease and licence in their names. The plaintiffs who lost both in the trial Court and the first appellate Court are the appellants in the second appeal.2. The suit property, viz., the Salt Pans, originally belonged to one M. China Sanyasayya Chetti. Narasimhulu Chetti was his adopted son. Chinna Mahalakshmamma under the will of whom the plaintiffs are claiming the suit property, was the wife of that Narasimhulu Chetti. China Sanyasi Chetti executed a will certified copy of which is Exhibit B-21 dated 12-8-1917 bequeathing the suit property in favour of his daughter-in-law. He died on 6-2-1925. Narasimhulu Chetti died in the year 1929. During her lifetime China Mahalakshmam...
Chilukuri Venkata Satyanarayana Rao Vs. Achanta Lakshmi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP415
Alladi Kuppuswami, J. 1. The plaintiff in O. S. 43/64 District Court East Godavari Rajahmundry is the appellant. He is the daughter's son of one Mr. Venkatramanayya who died on 8-2-1891 leaving behind him his widow, Rukminamma and has two daughters, Venkata Hanumayamma and Ramaseetamma. Venkata Hanumayamma died in 1929 and Rukminamma died on 18-3-1932. On the death of Venktaramanayya his widow Rukminamma became entitled to a woman's estate in his properties and on her death, as the daughter, Venkata Hanumayamma, had predeceased her, Ramaseethamma such proceeded to the properties. She died on 8-2-1955. After her death, the plaintiff filed the suit claiming that he was the reversioner to the Estate of Venkataramanayya. His case was that he had a younger brother Venkataramana Rao who died on 17-6-1964 before the reversion opened and therefore he alone was entitled to the properties. During the lifetime of Rukminamma, Venkata Hanumayamma, and Ramaseethamma, several alienation's were made i...
Employees' State Insurance Corporation, Hyderabad Vs. Andhra Pradesh P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP18; [1978(36)FLR58]; (1978)ILLJ469AP
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. These two matters have been referred by a Division Bench of this court consisting of Madhava Reddy, and A. V. Krishna Rao, JJ. under the following circumstances :The view expressed by the Supreme Court in Braithwaite and Co. v. E.S.I.C., : (1968)ILLJ550SC , came to be considered by Division Bench of this Court in Regional Director , E.S.I.C. v. Vazir Sultan Tobacoo Co. Ltd. , (1972) 2 Lab LJ 602 : (1973 Lab IC 523 (Andh Pra) ). In a subsequent judgment in C.M.A. No. 331 of 1974 decided by a Division Bench consisting of Chinnappa Reddy Punnayya JJ. on April 13, 1976 (reported in 1977 Lab IC 313 (Andh Pra)), a different view was taken and the subsequent Division Bench of this Court felt that the view expressed in the earlier division in Regional Director , E.S.I.C. v. Vazir Sultan Tobacoo Co. (Supra) was directly opposed to what the Supreme Court laid down in Braithwaite and Co. v. E.S.I.C. (Supra). In view of this difference of opinion the Division Bench consisting of...
Dachepalli Ramanujam Vs. Dara Raju and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP143
1. The point that arises for determination in this appeal is whether a third party attaching creditor is a person 'holding an interest in the property' within the meaning of that expression as occurring in O. 21, R. 89 of the Civil P. C. for enabling him to have the sale set aside2. This appeal by the 1st defendant is directed against the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Vizianagaram made in E A. No. 436 of 1975 in E. P. No. 71 of 1972 in O. S. No. 16/1968. That suit was instituted for the recovery of money. That was decreed. E. P. No. 71 of 1972 was filed for the purpose of securing the execution of the decree passed in the above suit. The house belonging to the judgment-debtor was put to auction and the auction was held on 25-9-1975. It is at that stage the third party filed E. A. No. 436 of 1975 under O. 21, R. 89 C.P.C. seeking the setting aside of the sale. That third party filed a suit O. S. No. 9 of 1972 against the appellant herein and obtained a decree for...
Botla Venkata Subba Rao Vs. Gonguntia Peda Papayya and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP238
ORDER1. The question of law that is involved in this revision petition is whether payment of the decretal amount by the Judgement-debtor to one of the decree-holders of a joint decree outside the Court can be treated as payment in full satisfaction of the decree.2. Sri P. V. R. Sarma, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, contends that such a payment can operate a valid discharge of the entire decree, while Sri M. Chandrasekhara Rao, the learned Counsel for the respondents, contends that payment to one of the decree-holders of a joint decree does not bind the other decree-holders and consequently does not give a valid discharge of the decree.3. The plaintiff's suit in S. C. No. 119/1960 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Narasaraopet was dismissed with costs. The plaintiff was required to pay to the defendants 1 to 3 the suit costs of Rs. 592-95. Hence the defendants filed E. P. No. 101/72 on 4-7-1972 for arrest of the petitioner-plaintiff who is the judgement-debtor. Whi...
Karumanchi Subba Rao Vs. Yarlagadda Venkatappaiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP193
ORDER1. The point raised in this revision petition is whether a defendant who filed the written statement stating that the suit instituted by the petitioner plaintiff can be decreed as prayed for has got any right to cross-examine the plaintiff ?2. This revision under S. 115 C. P. C. by the plaintiff is directed against the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Bapatla in I. A. No. 270 of 1976 in O. S. No. 56 of 1970 dated April, 15, 1976.3. O. S. No. 56 of 1970 was instituted by the petitioner before the court below for a declaration that the debt due by the plaintiff to the first defendant was partially discharged. Para 9 of plaint mentions about the relief and reads thus:'Therefore the plaintiff prays that the court may be pleased to pass a decree in favour of the plaintiff against the 1st defendant, (i) for declaration that the debt due by the plaintiff to 1st defendant under promissory note dated 19-12-1969 was discharged to the extent of Rs. 7315-41 or with alternative....
Boda Narayana Murthy and Sons Vs. Valluri Venkata Suguna and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP257
Ramachandra Raju, J. 1. Plaintiff in the suit is appellant in the appeal . It is a firm represented by one of the petitioners. The suit is laid to recover a sum of Rs. 52,087.47 with interest form the date of suit, on the foot of an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deed made by one late. N. V. Narshimham, father of defendants 1 and 2. Only one title deed was deposited and it is Ex. A-9 dated 23-1-1945 under which the site, an up-stair building and some structures standing thereon, were conveyed in favour of five persons, namely father of defendants 1 and 2, 3rd defendant, Nidamarthi Suraiah Venkata Krishna Murthy and one Nidamarthi Satyanarayana Murthy. Subsequently, a cinema house, called 'Minerva Takies' was built on the site purchased under Ex A-9 by the time equitable mortgage was created which is evidenced by the Memorandum, Ex. A-10 dated 19-1-1970. According to Ex. A-10 the deposit was made on 18-1-1970.2. After obtaining Ex. A-9, one of the five purchasers viz., Venkatakr...
Patel Engineering Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-17-1977
Reported in: (1978)ILLJ147AP
Alladi Koppuswami, J.1. The appellant is a contractor who was entrusted with Power Tunnel Work in Srisailam Project. On 25th July, 1973 a number of labourers were proceeding in a lorry belonging to the Government. There was an accident in which 21 persons travelling in the lorry were fatally injured. 17 of them, who were workmen working directly under the Government, applied for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act and were paid the compensation due to them. The other four were employed by the appellant-contractor and they were, therefore, directed to approach the contractor for payment of compensation. But as no compensation was paid, they initiated proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, by his order dated 21st October, 1975, awarded compensation of Rs. 7,000 each for the applicants in W.C. Nos. 109 of 1974, 153 of 1974 and 156 of 1974 deducting a sum of Rs. 150 under Section 8(4) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, w...
Sakalabhaktula Vykunta Rao and ors. Vs. Made Appalaswamy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP103
ORDER1. This revision is directed against the order passed by the District Muncif, Tekkali in I.A. No. 470/1976 in O.S. No. 75/1976.2. The petitioners are the defendants 1 and 2 in the suit O.S. No. 75/1976 which was filed for permanent injunction. Along with the suit, the plaintiff filed I.A. No. 369/1976 for the grant of temporary injunction pending disposal of the suit. The plaintiff filed some affidavits in support of the above mentioned I.A. One of the affidavits was given by the Village Karnam. The learned District Muncif granted interim injunction and issued notice to the respondents-defendants who are the petitioners herein. The petitioners after receiving the notice, filed a petition for vacating the interim injunction. The petitioners-defendants filed I.A. No. 470/1976 requesting the Court to summon the Village Karnam so that they would cross- examine him, as his affidavit contained certain false averments. This petition was opposed by the respondents-plaintiff. The learned D...
B. Chinna Narasimhulu Vs. Iragam Setti Pullaiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-15-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP159
Alladi Kuppuswami, J. 1. This is an appeal against the Judgment and order of our learned brother Muktadar, J. dismissing the appeal against an Order vacating the interim injunction granted in I. A. No. 167 of 1976 in O. S. No. 50 of 1976. In this application interim injunction was originally granted b y the Subordinate Judge. When the Court was closed for summer vacation the interim injunction. In the C.M.A. preferred against that order it was contended that the vacation Court had no jurisdiction to withdraw a case from another Court and dispose of the same. This contention was negatived by Justice Muktadar, who held that on a proper construction of s. 32 (2) (a0 and (b) of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Courts Act. 1972 the vacation Court has jurisdiction to withdraw any proceeding pending in any Court in the district. We are in agreement with this view. Section 32 (2) (5) is clear and states that the jurisdiction of the vacation Civil Judge extends to all suits, appeals and other proceedin...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »