Andhra Pradesh Court March 1979 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.
Hasimathunnisa Begum Vs. Vithal Rao Gangaji and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-29-1979
Reported in: AIR1979AP273
ORDER1. This revision petition is directed by the legal representative of the first defendant against the order of the IInd Asst. Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in E. P. No. 79/71 appointing a Commissioner who recommended that the matter be referred to a valuer for working out equities in dividing the suit house. The circumstances leading to the revision petition briefly stated are these:The first respondent (plaintiff No. l) herein laid a suit against the defendants, the first defendant being the pre decessor in interest of the revision petitioner herein He also happens to be natural father of the second defendant. The suit was for reconveyance of suit house based on an agreement of 'conveyance. The trial court decreed the suit and this was confirmed by the first appellate Court. In a second appeal preferred by the second defendant in the suit, the decrees of both the courts were modified. The operative portion of the judgment in the Second Appeal reads as follows:-- 'The plaintif...
Shaw Wallace and Company Ltd. Vs. Sri Venkateswara Bone Mill
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-1979
Reported in: [1980]45STC416(AP)
Raghuvir, J.1. The defendant in the suit (O.S. No. 123 of 1974) summoned the Commercial Tax Officer at Guntur (C.T.O., Guntur) to produce the assessment orders for 1973-74 and 1974-75 in respect of the firm, Sri Venkateswara Bone Mill, Santhamaguluru, the plaintiff in the suit, and the 'record' relating to 'inspection' conducted by the officers of the commercial taxes department. The C.T.O., Guntur, at first brought to the notice of the court that the 'records' summoned under rule 61 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 (the Rules), are treated 'confidential' but later, the C.T.O. Guntur, having obtained permission from the Commissioner, produced the 'record' before the court. In subsequent proceedings, while the C.T.O., Guntur, was being examined as a witness, it was stated (by a memo) by the plaintiff that the record produced cannot be used and is 'prohibited' to be used except when 'Government is a party' which is not the case and the court 'shall not encourage the vi...
The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh Vs. B. Babu and an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-1979
Reported in: AIR1979AP221
ORDER1. Two interesting questions of importance arise for consideration m these two Revision Cases. The respondent in Criminal Revision Case No. 360 1978 is the Assistant Engineer of the sub-station of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board, hereinafter referred to as 'the Board', situate at Shahpurnagar, while the respondent m Criminal Revn. Case No. 361 of 1978 is the Asstt. Engineer of the sub-station of the Board situate at Moulali The Asstt. Inspector of Factories, Nalgonda, instituted complaints against the accused-respondents u/ss. 6 and 92 of the Factories Act read with Rule 5 (3) of the Rules framed thereunder before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Hyderabad, East and North and the same were taken on file in S.T.C. Nos. 384 and 354/1977.2. The accusation levelled against the respondents is that no licence was obtained by the respondents in charge of the two sub-sections. ' required under Rule 5 (3) of the Rules, which lays down that no manufacturing processes shall be...
P. Satyanarayana Vs. the Land Reforms Tribunal and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-1979
Reported in: AIR1980AP149
Seetharama Reddy, J. 1. Our learned brother Jeevan Reddy, J. before whom this Writ Petition challenging the authority and jurisdiction of the Land Reforms Tribunal to reopen the order passed earlier by it, came up for hearing, thought it proper that there should be an authoritative pronouncement on the question, inasmuch as there is no decision of this Court on the said question and also because there are several such Writ Petition pending for decision before this Court. 2. The facts that led to this writ petition, in brief, are that the petitioner filed a declaration of his holding as required by Section 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act 1975, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. In col. (6) of the declaration, he mentioned 5 minor children besides his wife as the members of his family. The Tahsildar stated in his verification as per Rule 4 (4) of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Rules 1974, that the petition...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. B.M. Bhandari (Executor of the Estate o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-1979
Reported in: (1980)14CTR(AP)18; [1980]123ITR554(AP)
C. Kondaiah, C.J. 1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, at the instance of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, hereinafter called ' the Act ', for the opinion of this court on the following question of law :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the executor is entitled to the exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, for the assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1967-68 '2. In order to appreciate the scope of the question, we may briefly state the facts found by the Tribunal and incorporated in the statement of case. The assessee, an executor of the will executed by late Pannalal Lahoti, died on 26th April, 1956, leaving behind him his wife, who was authorised to adopt a son after his death. Pursuant to the authority given by her husband, Bhima Bai has taken a boy in adoption. However, the execution is not yet complete for the assessment years 1965-66 to 1967-68. The...
Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. Valluru Venkateswara Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1979
Reported in: [1980]123ITR54(AP)
C.N. Kondaiah, C. J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Gift-tax, Andhra Pradesh-II, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has submitted under Section 26(1) of the G.T. Act of 1958, hereinafter called the Act, the statement of case for the opinion of this court on the following question of law : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the immovable property transferred by the karta of the assessee family in favour of his wife by virtue of the deed dated March 26, 1970, was not liable to gift-tax? '2. We may briefly refer to the material facts that gave rise to the aforesaid question of law. Sri Valluru Venkateswara Rao, who is the karta of a HUF, the assessee herein, made a gift of immovable property of 2 acres 95 cents of dry land worth about a lakh of rupees by a registered deed dated March 26, 1970, in favour of his wife, Smt. Valluru Chandravati, towards her maintenance. For the assessment year 1970-71, the assessee...
Vadami Bai Vs. Shaik HussaIn and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-1979
Reported in: AIR1980AP14
Gangadhara Rao, J.1. Sha Nemaji Champalal (1st defendant) obtained an ex parte decree against the deceased Shaik Subhani, the husband of the 3rd defendant and father of defendants 4 to 7 in Small Cause Suit No 729/1965 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Guntur. In execution of that decree, he brought the plaint schedule house for sale in E. P. No. 568/1969, stating that it belonged to the deceased Sheik Subhani. The plaintiff filed a Claim Petition to 27th June, 1970. Both the petitions were adjourned to 30th June, 1970. On 27th June, 1970, the sale was held and the property was purchased by Vadambi Bai (8th defendant). On 30th June, 1970 both the claim petition and the adjournment petition were dismissed. Then the plaintiff filed the suit O.S. No. 818/1970 in the Court of the District Munsif. Guntur, on 17th August, 1970 under O. 21, Rule 63, C. P. C. to set aside the order dated 30th June, 1970 in the claim petition. he did not make the auction purchaser a party to that suit...
Muddada Chayanna Vs. G. Veerabhadrarao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1979
Reported in: AIR1979AP253
Amareswari, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Subordinate Judge. Srikakulam, dated 15-2-1974 rejecting the plaint filed by the plaintiff.2. The plaintiff is the appellant herein. The suit was instituted against defendants 1 to 4 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 98,355-36 with subsequent interest at 6 per cent per annum towards damages for irregularities in conducting the sale of movable property. Defendant 1 is one Sri G. Veerabhadra Rao who was working as the then (principal) Subordinate Judge. Srikakulam. Defendant 2 is the receiver who has been appointed by the 1st defendant. Defendant 3 is the executive Officer of Devasthanam who filed the execution petition for executing the decree and defendant 1 is the advocate who appears for defendant 3. The case of the plaintiff is that for realisation of balance of the decretal amount in O. S. l /63 the 3rd defendant representing the decree holder deities got bled E. P. 64/72. The 4th defendant is the advocate who filed the executi...
Syed Moosa Quadri Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1979
Reported in: AIR1980AP236
Ramachandra Rao, J. 1. This writ appeal is preferred against the order dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant for the issue of a writ of mandamus declaring the order of the Government of Andhra Pradesh in G. O. Ms. No. 928 M. A. dated 13-11-1971 advising the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad to consider and accept the tender of the 3rd respondent for construction of Putli Bowli Market Complex as illegal and to direct the respondents to issue tender forms to the appellant for the said works. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows:3. The Municipal corporation of Hyderabad called for tenders for construction of Putlibowli Market Complex in the Hyderabad City which was estimated to cost Rs. 75.77 lakhs. The first notice inviting the tenders was issued on 25-8-1976 fixing the last date for receipt of the tenders as 25-2-1977 which was later extended to 7-3-1977. The 3rd respondent was the sole tenderer but his tender was rejected on 31-1-1978 by the Special Off...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-1979
Reported in: [1983]139ITR615(AP)
Kondaiah, J.1. This writ petition by the Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, A.P., Hyderabad, gives rise to a short question of law relating to the scope and applicability of Section 254(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ' the Act '). In order to appreciate the scope of the question, we may briefly refer to the facts that gave rise to this question. The 2nd respondent-assessee had preferred an appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, against the order of the AAC, who had confirmed a levy of penalty of a sum of Rs. 25,000 by the ITO, September 25, 1967. The Appellate Tribunal had, by its order dated April 23, 1971, allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee holding that the penalty cannot be levied in this case, as part of the tax was paid, and that there was a genuine effort on the part of the assessee to pay the entire amount of tax and its bona fides were not questioned by the assessing authority. Subsequently, the Tribunal had passed a corrigendum on ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »