Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.
Satyavolu Venkata Bhaskara Umamaheswara Varaprasada Murthy Vs. Potti V ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP176; 1977(2)APLJ36
ORDER1. This revision petition arises out of execution proceedings initiated by the auction purchaser, the first respondent herein under O, 21, R. 93, C. P. C, for recovery of the purchase money and other expenses from the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor, the petitioner and the second respondent respectively in the revision petition.2. The decree-holder and judgment-debtor are brothers. The decree-holder obtained three money decrees against his brother in three suits in O. S. No. 17 of 1956, O. S. No. 63/55 and O. S. No. 2 of 1956 on the file of the District Court, East Godavari at Rajahmundry. All the three decrees were compromise decrees creating a charge on three items of property belonging to the judgment-debtor.3. In execution of the decree in O. S. No. 17 of 1956, the decree-holder brought Item No. 1 of the charged property to sale, in E. P. No. 13 of 1960. The auction was held on 28-8-1961.. The first respondent was the highest bidder for Rupees 13,000/-. He deposited into...
Seetharama Naidu Vs. Chittoor Dist. Co-op. Central Bank Ltd. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1977
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ363AP
Alladi Kuppuswami, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a Supervisor in the Chittoor District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd., who is the first respondent herein. He was later promoted as Bank Inspector and was confirmed in that post as from 1st January, 1963 by an order dated 28th February, 1964.2. During the course of a detailed inspection of the Co-operative Society it was found that a sum of Rs. 1,000 collected from some members was shown as remitted to the Bank but it was not supported by any challan. The petitioner was, therefore, called upon to explain the above lapse on his part and why severe disciplinary action should not be taken against him. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 21st January, 1974. Meanwhile by an order dated 9th January, 1974 of the President he was suspended pending detailed enquiry into his conduct and character. On 12th January, 1971 the Chief Executive Officer of the Society one Narendranath passed an order under Section 55 of the Co-operative Soc...
Rashed Abdullah Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-29-1977
Reported in: 1977CriLJ1792
ORDERSambasiva Rao, J.1. The petitioner was convicted for the offence Under Section 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act and sentenced to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment by the Eleventh Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. In appeal the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, confirmed the conviction and the sentence. The present revision case is directed against these concurrent decisions.2. On 27th of September, 1974 at about 3-30 p. m. a party of the customs officials accompanied by two panchas searched the house of the revision petitioner and found 45 bottles of foreign liquor. They also seized from his possession cash of Rs. 21,900/-. The sum of Rs. 21,900/- was later returned to the petitioner. But on 25th of June 1975 an order was passed confiscating the 45 bottles of foreign liquor and also imposing a penalty of Rs. 1,000/-. On 12-1-1976 the complaint was lodged.3. What was mentioned is an offence Under Section 135(b) of the Customs Act. By an amendment effected in 1973 Sect...
T. Munuswami Naidu (Died) and ors. Vs. R. Venkata Reddi and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP200
Smabasiva Rao, J.1. Is the operation of S. 56 (1) of the Andra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates Abolition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Abolition Act') limited only to the purposes of Ss. 55 and 56 (1) (a) and (b) of that Act? Cannot the Settlement Officer decide the question as to who the lawful ryot in respect of any holding is when such a dispute arises whole considering the application or applications filed under S. 11 of the Abolition Act for granting ryotwari pattas and also when a similar question arises under the other provisions of the Abolition Act? A Full Bench of three Judges of this Court answered the first question in the affirmative and the second in the negative in Cherukuru Muthayya v. Gadde Gopalakrishnayya : AIR1974AP85 (FB). A Division Bench of this Court consisting of Divan, C. J. and Ameraswari J. doubted the correctness of this view and felt that it required reconsideration. That is why as many as five of us are obliged to examine the question.2. The dispute ...
Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam Vs. Commissioner of Labour
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-1977
Reported in: (1979)ILLJ448AP
Alladi Kuppuswami, J.1. The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam is the petitioner in each of these writ petitions (hereinafter referred to in this judgment as the Devasthanam). In these petitions the Devasthanam prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution directing the 1st respondent and the 2nd respondent, viz., The Commissioner of Labour, Andhra Pradesh and the Registrar of Trade Unions, Andhra Pradesh, not to enforce the provisions of Trade Unions Act in respect of the 3rd respondent-union and to cancel the registration of the union under the Indian Trade Unions Act. In Writ Petition No. 840 of 1976 the 3rd respondent is the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam Water Supply and Power Workers Union and the 3rd respondent in Writ Petition No. 1866 of 1976 is the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam Employees Union. The Water Supply and Power Workers Union consists of the employees in the Water Supply and Electricity Department of the Dev...
The Income-tax Officer, Hyderabad Vs. Secunderabad TIn Industries, Hyd ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP180
1. The Income -tax Officer, J.- Ward, Hyderabad has preferred this appeal against the order dated 8th April, 1975 passed by our learned brother ,Gangadhara Rao, J., allowing the Writ, Petn. No. 1464 of 1972 filed by the respondent. 2. The facts relevant for purposes of this appeal are these: The respondent was a firm originally constituted in 1961. It was registered under the Indian Income-tax Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act. On 31-3-66, one of the partners by name G. S. Naidu retired and a new partner A. S. Nandagopal was brought into the partnership. For the assessment year 1968-69, the return was filed, on 20-1-1971. The respondent firm paid a sum of Rs. 4,720/- on 11-2-1971 on self assessment basis under s. 140-A of the Income-tax Act. The assessment was completed on 20-5-1971 and the Income-tax Officer levied besides the tax a sum of Rs. 1,056/- as interest under S. 217 of the Act for failure to voluntarily file the provisional estimate. The Income-tax Officer also levied ...
M. Vengamma and ors. Vs. K. Duravasulu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1977
Reported in: [1980]50CompCas264(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. One M. Somanna died in an accident, involving the Ambassador Car in which he was travelling, on 11-3-1970. The car was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and it went and hit a lorry, resulting in injuries to the deceased, leading to his instantaneous death. His legal representatives filed O. P. LNo. 43 of 1970, claiming a compensation of Rs. 30,000 on that account. The claim was made against the owner of the taxi-car (1st respondent) and against the Insurance Company (2nd respondent). While the 1st respondent remained ex parte, the 2nd respondent defended the action, contending that there was no negligence or rashness on the part of the driver of the taxi-car. It further denied the quantum of compensation claimed by the petitioners. The Insurance Company filed an additional counter stating that the taxi-car was licensed to carry only five passengers and that, in fact, it was carrying nine passengers at the time of the alleged incident and, therefore, the 2n...
Lipton (India) Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Secretary to Govt, Employment and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP146; (1978)ILLJ247AP
B.J. Divan, C.J. 1. Both these writ petitions have been placed before this Special Bench of five Judges on an order of reference made by a Division Bench consisting of Alladi Kuppuswami and Punnayya, JJ., as the learned Judges felt that, in view of Art. 228A(3) of the Constitution of India, as inserted by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, the minimum number of Judges, who have to sit for the purpose of determining any question as to the constitutional validity of any State Law must be five.2. The petitioners in both these writ petitions challenge the constitutional validity of S. 2, sub-s. (21) of the Andhra Paradesh Shops and Establishments Act, as amended by the Andhra Pradesh Act 2 of 1969. The alternative contention on behalf of the petitioners in these writ petitions is that, even if it were to be held that S. 2, sub-s. (21) of the Andhra Pradesh Shops and Establishments Act is valid, the notification issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on Aug. 31, 1972 is invali...
V.V.V.R.K. Yachandra Bahadur Varu Vs. the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board, H ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-15-1977
Reported in: AIR1978AP156
ORDER1. The simple question that is raised in this writ petition is whether the petitioner, a non-Muslim, is 'a person interested in a Wakf', within the meaning of S. 3 of the Wakf Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'.2. To answer this question it is enough if the undisputed facts are referred to. The petitioner is a non-Muslim, and he is the owner of a premises known as Bada Ashurkhana, Bandar Khana, Alawa site comprising an extent of about 60 Ankanams and buildings in Venkatagiri Town, Nellore District. The ancestors of the petitioner constructed the Bada Ashurkhana. It is also called Nagari Peerla Chavidi. The ancestors of the petitioner encouraged religious activities of all religions. They were using the above site and building for performing Moharam Festival in which the family members and the servants of the estate used to participate for the last 100 years. The petitioner's family got Peerlu made of silver and gold and they have been celebrating Moharam Festival from times...
Daniatram Vyas Vs. Saraswati Bai and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ806
ORDERSambasiva Rao, J.1. When some sort of allowance is being paid to the wife by the husband, is she precluded from claiming maintenance Under Section 125 Cr. P. C? Can the husband take shelter under the fact of his paying some amount to the wife to contend that there is no neglect or refusal to maintain within the meaning of Section 125 Cr.PC mainly these are the questions which I will have to answer in this criminal revision case.2. This case arises out of a petition filed by a wife against her husband for maintenance Under Section 125 Cr. P, C at the rate of Rs. 500 per month which is the maximum prescribed under that provision. The couple had been married long time ago and had two daughters, one died as an infant and the other grew up and later married. From 1952 the wife was living apart from her husband in a separate house. She was being paid Rupees 100 p. m. as allowance. In about 1966 it was raised to Rs. 200 and later in 1969 to Rs. 300 per month. Originally they were living ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »