Court : Andhra Pradesh
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.9065 OF201210-10-2013 Smt. Bommidipati Madhavi....Petitioner/accused The State of Andhra Pradesh rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another....Respondents Counsel for Petitioner/accused:Sri E.Venkata Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.1 : Public Prosecutor Counsel for Respondent No.2 : Sri G.Ram Gopal HEAD NOTE: ?.Cases referred:1. (2002) 5 SCC6612) 1992 Supp (1) SCC3353) 1997(2) SCC6994) (2011) 5 SCC708 (2011) 2 SCC (Crl) 764 5) (2008) 17 SCC1476) (1984) 4 SCC3527) (2000) 1 SCC18) 2011(3) SCC351HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.9065 OF2012ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short 'the Cr.P.C.'), is filed by the petitioner - accused who is proprietress of M/s. Sai Santhosh Constructions ( for short 'the firm'), seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.170 of 2012 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam, Visa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1986]60CompCas568(AP)
Kodandaramayya, J.1. Among numerous question of law, two interesting company law problems are raised in this civil appeal by Sri T. Veerabhadraiah, the learned counsel for the appellants : (1) Whether a conveyance is necessary to vest the property of a firm when the same was converted into a company (2) Similarly whether such conveyance is necessary to claim title by the company in respect of property acquired by the promoter before its incorporation 2. A considerable time and lengthy debate had taken place and, hence, we are impelled to state this in the forefront. Now, we shall state the facts. 3. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 36 of 1969 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Vijayawada, are the appellants in this appeal. The suit is laid for eviction of the defendants from the plaint schedule site after declaring the suit lease as duly terminated, removing the structures and deliver vacant possession of the same. The plaintiffs are grandsons of one Vali Subbarayudu and it is ave...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1983]53CompCas73(AP)
Alladi Kuppuswami, C.J.1. These appeals are directed against the judgment of our learned brother, Chennakesav Reddy J., dismissing Company Petitions Nos. 10 and 12 of 1980. 2. C.P. No. 10/1980 was filed by two shareholders of the Andhra Bank Ltd. under ss. 433 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956, praying for the winding-up of the company and for other consequential reliefs. C.P. No. 12/1980 is a petition filed under ss. 397 and 398 of the Companies Act on the ground that the affairs of the company are being conducted in a manner oppressive to some of the members of the company including the petitioners and other members set out in the schedule to the petition, and on the ground that the company was being mismanaged. They prayed that this court might regulate the conduct of the company's affairs by reconstituting the board of directors and providing safeguards for the future, and for other reliefs, or in the alternative to direct a payment of Rs. 610 per share to the dissenting sharehold...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1965AP1
ORDER(1) These two writ petitions are filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution, and the central question involved in both the applications being common they can be deposed of by one common judgment. I would however mention for the purpose of appreciating the other points the facts of both the cases separately. (2) In writ petition No. 117 of 1963, the petitioner, who is admittedly a minor but was admitted to the partnership firm for the purposes of benefit, was assessed for the years 1957 to 1960. The assessment however did not include the surcharge treating the income during that period as an unearned income. It makes difference because in cases of earned income, the surcharge is 5% while in cases of unearned income the surcharge is 15%. The Income-tax Officer, acting under Section 35 of the Income-tax Act, hereinafter called 'the Act', went into the record of the assessment for the year 1960-61 and as he thought that the record disclosed a mistake, inasmuch as the petitioner was not ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1984AP200
Jagannadha Rao, J.1. The question that falls for consideration in this appeal relates to the power of the Court to grant stay under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. 1940 in cases involving allegations of fraud or allegations affecting professional reputation.2. The respondent filled the suit D. S. No. 580 of 1982 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada for settlement of accounts of the 1st defendant firm ' Sri Venkateswara Estates' and for rendition of accounts and for allotting to the respondent his share of 10 paise in the property and in amounts that may be found due on settlement of accounts. He also alternatively claimed for dissolution of the said firm and settlement of accounts and for the appointment of a receiver. Originally there was a registered partnership deed dated 27-11-75 which is marked as Ex. B. 1 in these proceedings. The partnership was at will and consisted of 17 partners. One of the partners gave site of 6000 square yards for the purpose of constructio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1958CriLJ1114
ORDERKumarayya, J.1. This is an application to quash Criminal proceedings for an offence under Section 409 IPC against Md. Abdul Sattar, managing partner of Shri Dhanalakshmi Rice and Oil Mill Contractors Company, Vijayawada. This company is a partnership concern. The partnership was created by an agreement between 16 persons in December 1954 for a period of two years for the purpose of working the said company at Vijayawada. The shares of all the partners are not equal. The accused has l/24th share therein. Like others he brought into the concern his own share of capital.He being more experienced in the business was, by a special resolution dated 9-12-1954, appointed a managing partner. A remuneration of Rs. 100/- per month was fixed for him by the said resolution to which he too was a party. He was to look after the purchases and sales of paddy, the working of the mill and correct maintenance of accounts and day to day business of the firm A cash credit account was opened in the Stat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (1985)49CTR(AP)76; [1986]159ITR929(AP)
Amareswari, J.1. This reference at the instance of the Revenue pertains to the assessment years 1970-71 to 1974-75. 2. The assessee is a firm styled as M/s. K. Ramaiah, K. Ramakrishna Murthy & Others, Guntur, constituted under a partnership deed dated January 11, 1959. The said firm was carrying on the business of redrying of tobacco up to January 17, 1963, and it was dissolved on March 8, 1963. The assets of the firm such as the godowns, plant and machinery, factory buildings were left to the partners of the dissolved firm, who thereupon became the co-owners of the said assets. The co-owners let out the godowns, factory buildings and plant and machinery to others for being used in the same business of redrying of tobacco The leases were renewed from time to time. For the assessment years 1964-65 to 1969-70, the coowners were assessed to tax as individuals in respect of their shares of the rental income derived from leasing out the assets. Separate assessments were also made on co-owne...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1989]176ITR160(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Three identical questions are referred in these references. The assessee is common. The questions referred are : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that there was no legal impediment to a major entering into a contractual relationship with others, respectively, from a point of time when he or she was a minor (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the partnership agreement dated January 4, 1972, did not, in any case, have the effect of making Shashi Rani liable for losses occurring or arising during her minority, though the partnership was stipulated to commence from a point of time when she was a minor (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the partnership was not opposed to any of the provisions of the Excise Act or the rules thereunder and was not vi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1998]229ITR304(AP)
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. This is a reference under section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue. The following questions are referred for the opinion of this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that Sri Ashok Kumar was not admitted to the benefits of partnership though he was not entitled to a share in losses (2) Whether, on the facts and law, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that Sri Ashok Kumar will not be entitled to the minimum guaranteed profits of Rs. 3,000 per annum in case of loss, and that the Andhra Pradesh High Court's decision in CIT v. B. Pandaiah and Co. : [1983]143ITR464(AP) , was not applicable to the facts of the case ?' 2. The controversy which led to the reference of the above questions relates to the assessment year 1980-81 for which the previous year ended on March 31, 1980. On April 6, 1979, a partnership was entered i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1985]154ITR643(AP)
Anjaneyulu, J.1. The following two question of law a refereed to this court for its opinion under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that development rebate cannot be withdrawn by applying the provisions of Section 155(5) (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that there is not transfer or sale within the meaning of section 34(3)(b) ?' 2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1970-71. The assessee was a Hindu joint family consisting of the 'karta' and three major sons. During the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1970-71, the family purchased new machinery of the value of Rs. 1,38,977 and secured deduction on account of development rebate to the extent of Rs. 48,648. On May 10, 1972, there was a partition of the joint family assets including the business of the family. After the partit...
Tag this Judgment!