Andhra Pradesh Court April 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.
Sri Brindavan Hotel, Hyderabad Vs. the Conciliation Officer, Hyderabad ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP386; [1977(35)FLR381]; (1978)IILLJ287AP
S.H. Sheth, J.1. This petition has been filed by M/s. Brindavan Hotel under the following circumstances :-The Hotel management terminated the services of certain employees on the ground that their services were not required. The Conciliation Officer, Hyderabad City, is the first respondent and the President of Brindavan Hotel Mazdoor Sangh is the second respondent. The Workers' Union raised the dispute in regard to the termination of the services of these employees. At the instance of the Union the Conciliation Officer, first respondent, issued under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 notice to the Hotel management for bringing about conciliation of the dispute between the parties if it could be brought about. The Hotel management thereupon filed this petition in which they challenge the jurisdiction of the conciliation officer to enter upon conciliation proceedings in this case.2. Mr. V. Jagannadha Rao, who appears for the Hotel management, has contended before us that the Hotel management...
The State of Andhra Pradesh and anr. Vs. Karri Magireddi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP43
Ramachandra Raju, J.1. The State of Andhra Pradesh is the petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition. The C. R. P. has arisen out of a declaration filed by the respondent under S. 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricutural) Act 1973, hereinafter referred to as the Act.2. There was a controversy between the Government and the respondent with regard to certain items of land, which according to the respondent, they are single crop Wet Lands and which according to the Government, they are double crop Wet Lands. The controversy was with regard to items comprised in S. Nos. 3/2, 104 and 571 of Pasalapudi Village in East Godavari District. The Land Reforms Tribunal, Rajahmundry before whom the declaration was filed, found that all the three items are double crop wet-lands. In the appeal filed by the declarant the Land Reforms Appellant Tribunal, Rajahmundry came to the conclusion that the items relating to S. Nos. 3/2 and 104 are not double crop wet-lands and they should be t...
Kalidindi Lakshminarasaraju Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP355
Ramachandra Raju, J.1. This C. R. P. arises under Section 21 of Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner is a declarant who filed his declaration as provided under Section 8 of the Act with regard to the land held by him. He has given 25 items of land in the declaration and out of it, for items 19 to 25 he claimed exemption on the ground that they were alienated by him. As the exemption was granted by the Tribunals, we are not now concerned with those items. We are concerned in this revision with items 1 to 18. Out of these items, the Tribunal considered items 15 to 18 of a total extent of Ac. 0-45 cents as 'single crop wet land' and items 1 to 14 as 'double crop wet lands'. The petitioner questions the correctness of the view this taken by the Tribunals.2. According to the petitioner, items 15 to 18 are registered 'dry lands' and the Tribunals went wrong in treating them as 'single crop wet lands', and...
Marni Veeranna Chowdary and ors. Vs. Kanumuri Lakshminarayana Rao and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP405
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. Defendant is the appellants. The Court below has decreed the respondents' suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 10,000 being the unpaid purchase money with interest @ 12% per annum. 2. According to the plaint averments, the first plaintiff (The suit was originally filed by this plaintiff alone and, on his death pending the suit, his legal representatives were brought on record as plaintiffs 2 to 4) purchased an undivided 1/3 share in an extent of 15,000 acres agency area of Orissa State, under a sale deed dated 29-3-1961, from one B. Suryanarayana Rao. Out of the said 1/3 share, he sold half the share to the defendant under a registered sale deed dated 12-6-1962. Though the sale-deed recites that the entire consideration was received by the first plaintiff prior to the execution of the said deed, the defendant did not actually pay the said consideration either wholly or partly. According to the first plaintiff his house was mortgaged to the defendant under a mortgage de...
Suryanarayana Rao and ors. Vs. Padi Thoyajakshamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP359
1. The judgment-debtors Nos. 1 and 3 are the appellants. This Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal arises out of the order in E. P. No. 142/1974 in O. S. No. 1093-1972, District Munsif's Court, Rajahmundry. The decree-holder (respondent) filed the execution petition under Order. 21, Rule. 48 of the Civil Procedure Code for attachment of the salary of the judgment-debtors who are non-gazetted railway employees. The question that arose for consideration in the Courts below and that arises for consideration now is whether what is called 'running allowance' paid to the judgment-debtors who are non-gazetted employees of the Railway and which is paid on the basis of mileage for their travel in the moving train is salary and therefore liable to be attached under the relevant provisions of Section 60 read with Order. 21, Rule. 48, Civil Procedure Code. The two Courts below have held that the allowance which is paid by way of 'running allowance' comes within the meaning of Clause (i) Section 60(1)...
P. Lingam Naidu Vs. Tahsildar, Parvathipuram and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP430
ORDER1. The notice issued by the Principal, Sainik School (hereinafter referred as the School) on 15-6-1967 and served on the writ petitioner forms the basis of controversy in this writ petition. The notice relates to Swami Naidu (the son of the petitioner) who studied in the School between July, 1962 to Dec. 1966. The petitioner submitted the application for his son's admission on 14-7-1962 to which were appended a declaration by the petitioner in an affidavit, a certificate issued by the Village Karnam, Katipa and another certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Parvathipuram showing the income of the petitioner as Rs.200/- a month. These documents were relied on by the Board of Governors of the School and they awarded 'A' grade scholarship to Swami Naidu. The Board of Governors further obtained a guarantee agreement on 6-4-1964 from the petitioner in the declaration as to the income was 'found' false by the Board of Governors the petitioner will be liable and obliged to refund the 'exce...
Binjusaria Khandasari Sugar Mills Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-19-1977
Reported in: [1978]41STC12(AP)
A. Sambasiva Rao, C.J.1. The question in this tax revision case is:Is the mother liquor which the petitioner calls liquid jaggery and patla gur produced by him during the course of manufacture of khandasari sugar liable to be taxed as molasses ?2. The petitioner says that this commodity cannot be taxed as molasses and sales tax can be levied only as gur or general commodity. On the other hand, the department maintains and this argument has been upheld by the hierarchy of the authorities including the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal that it is taxable as molasses.3. We will then note a few material facts. The petitioner is a dealer in khandasari sugar and jaggery. This problem arose in respect of the assessment year 1974-75. For that year, the petitioner submitted a return showing a turnover of Rs. 31,465 relating to sales of what he called 'liquid jaggery' (patla gur) and claimed that it should be taxed at 6 per cent only as jaggery, while the Commercial Tax Officer treated it as 'molasse...
Panyam Cements and Mineral Industries Ltd. Vs. Addl. Commissioner of I ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-1977
Reported in: [1979]117ITR770(AP)
Amareswari, J.1. In this case, the following three questions of law have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act to the High Court for its opinion :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the amount of Rs. 1,54,561 and Rs. 51,821 received from the Government of Andhra Pradesh as power subsidy in the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68, respectively, are taxable under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in deleting Rs. 66,684 from the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 1966-67 ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in directing the Income-tax Officer to grant depreciation allowance on the roads and bridges ?' 2. The first question was referred at the instance of the assessee and...
Konda Lakshman Bapuji Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-1977
Reported in: AIR1977AP427
S.H. Sheth, J.1. The plaintiff filed O.S. No. 13 of 1908 originally against four defendants for declaration of his title to the suit land and for recovery of possession thereof. The suit land is situated in the City of Hyderabad and is 19 acres in extent. The plaintiff alleged that he was the Inamdar of this land and that in fact the suit land was a part of a big Inam which he owned. He further alleged that in 1353 F. (1944 A.D.) he was wrongfully dispossessed by the Government of the suit land. The State of Andhra Pradesh is the first defendant. The second defendant claims to be the rival Inamdar in respect of the suit land. Defendants 3 and 4 are the grantees of a part of land from defendant No. 2. Defendants 5 to 8 are also grantees. Amongst defendants 9 to 77 there are some defendants who claim a share in the suit land with defendant No. 2 and others are purchasers. The plaintiff originally joined to the suit defendants 1 to 4. Defendants 5 to 77 were joined to the suit later at th...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vijaya Jewellery Mart
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-1977
Reported in: [1979]116ITR53(AP)
Sambasiva Rao, Actg. C.J.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to close its accounts on November 5, 1962, for the assessment year 1963-64 without obtaining the ITO's consent as laid down in Section 3(4) of the I. T. Act, 1961 ?'1. This is the question which has been referred to the High Court by the Tribunal.2. The assessee is a registered firm. It used to carry on business in manufacture and sale of gold and silver jewellery. It filed a return for the accounting year commencing from November 5, 1961, and ending with November 5, 1962. The ITO took objection to this, pointing out that according to the partnership deed of the firm the books of account were to be closed on Diwali day every year and that the Diwali day during that year fell on October 26, 1962. The assessee closed his accounts on a later day without the permission of the ITO under Section 3(4) of the I.T. Act. The assessee in reply to a letter from the ITO explained that rig...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »