Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1961AP390
Srinivasachari, J.1. This appeal is against the judgment of our learned brother, Ansari, J. The facts relating to this appeal briefly are that one Bhumayya, son of Sambiah, was the owner oF house No. 489-16-B (new) known as 'Rukmini Vilas' situated in Mahubpura, Gowliguda, Hyderabad. The said Bhumiah executed a will on 23rd Isfanclar, 1349 Fasti (23rd January 1940), under which he bequeathed the house by dividing it into three portions giving away two portions to his sons, who are defendants 1 and 2 in the case, and one portion to his wife, Rukkamma.Three rooms on the ground floor and three rooms on the top floor, marked red in the plan annexed to the will, were given over to the wife, while two rooms on the first floor and three rooms on the ground-floor, marked yellow in the plan were given over to the sons. The further recital in the will is to the effect that the upstairs of the house and three rooms on the ground floor were in the occupation of Dr. Bopardikar with whom the propert...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (1961)ILLJ569AP
ORDERP. Chandra Reddi, C.J.1. The petitioner seeks the removal of an order of dismissal passed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on certiorari.2. The material facts giving rise to the writ petition are capable of a concise statement. The petitioner Joined the Hyderabad Revenue Service in 1940 and from 1948 onwards he had been holding the posts of the category of District Collector. In 1956, he was appointed the Deputy Secretary to Government in the Public Works Department, while so, on the basis of a report submitted by the X Branch, OLD., in respect of certain allegations of corruption and other misconduct, the Government of Andhra Pradesh referred the matter to the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings under Section 4 of the Hyderabad Public Servants (Tribunal of Inquiry) Act, 1950 (XXIII of 1950) (hereinafter will be referred to as the Act for convenience).2. As many as nineteen charges of corruption were framed against him by the Tribunal and the petitioner was called upon to fur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1962AP65
ORDER(1) These revision petitions raise an interesting question. The City Civil Court, Madras, returned two plaints for presentation to the proper court under Order 7, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaints were re-presented to the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Kurnool, within the State of Andhra, subsequent to its formation. The question is whether the plaintiff is entitled to credit for the court-fee levied in the City Civil Court,Madras? (2) As the question is bare of authority so far as this Court is concerned and is of far reaching importance to the revenues of the State, notice was given to the learned Advocate General and I have had the benefit of his argument.(3) For a proper appreciation of the point arising for determination, it is necessary to refer to the legislative history of the law relating to the levy and collection of court-fees. Nearly ninety years ago, the Central Legislature enacted the Court Fees Act (VII of 1870), which extended to the whole of B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1964AP407; (1962)IILLJ639AP
Satyanarayana Raju, J. 1. These two petitions, filed under Article 228 of the Constitution of India, raise identical question for decision, and it will be convenient to dispose of them in a common judgment.2. The petitioner in the former of the petitions was a mechanic in the service of the Road Transport Department of the erstwhile State of Hyderabad ; and the petitioner in the other petition was a conductor. The respondent in both the petitions is the Chief Executive Officer of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to, for the sake of convenience, as 'the Corporation'),3. For a better appreciation of the contentions raised before us, it will be convenient to set out in brief outline the antecedent history of the Corporation. Originally, the Road Transport Department of the erstwhile Hyderabad State was providing road transport services in the territories which formed part of that State. The Department was there functioning as a State Transport Unde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963AP365
Chandra Reddy, C.J. 1. This is an appeal against the order of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, declining to grant a temporary injunction restraining the respondents herein from receiving or taking delivery of all or any of the plaint schedule properties either moveable or immoveable, or to receive any amounts from the Receiver-cum-Commissioner appointed in C. S. No. 13 of 1958 on the file of the High Court pending disposal of the suit O. S. No. 23 of 1961 on the file of the City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 2. The application was made under Order 39, Rule 2 pending a suit brought by the appellant in forma pauperis claiming to be the daughter of the Nawab Mir Yousuf AH Khan popularly known as Sir Salar Jung III (hereinafter to be referred to as the Nawab) for a declaration that she is the legitimate daughter of the said Nawab and for possession of his assets and properties. 3. Sir Salar Jung III died on 22-3-1949 leaving behind him enormous private properties and a big jagir whi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1965AP40
Jaganmohan Reddy, J.(1) This Writ Petition and many others which raise a similar question, challenges the validity of G. O. Ms. No. 532 dated 15-5-1964 issued by the Panchayat Raj Department of the Government of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner also imputes mala fides in so far as the reconstitution of the Gudur Panchayat Samithi in such a manner as to take away some Panchayats which were supporting him and attaching the same to some other Samithi is concerned. The petitioner/ who belongs to the Swantantra Party is the President of Momidi Panchayat in Gudur Taluk and was also the President of the Gudur Panchayat Samithi constituted on 1-11-1959. In the present elections also, he has been elected as the President of the Momidi Panchayat. According to him, the ruling party wanted to set up one Siddareddy Venkata Krishna Reddy for the Presidentship of the Panchayat Samithi during the 1960 elections, and for that purpose he was sought to be brought in as a co-opted member, but that attempt h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1965AP474
ORDERVenkatesam, J. This second appeal raises the following questions:-(1) The scope of S. 102 (e) of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. Sri Narasimha Iyengar relies on a decision of Justice Gopal Rao Ekbote in Syed Sharfuddin v. Andrews, (1963) 1 Andh WR (NRC) 9 (1), that in order to invoke S. 102 (e) a notification in the Jarida, reserving any particular area for urban, non-agricultural or industrial development should be made, and that the notification of the municipal limits of the City of Hyderabad already made is not sufficient to exclude the operation of the said Act to agricultural lands situate within those limits.(2) The scope of Ss. 34 (1) (a) (iii) and 34 (3) of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. (3) The scope of Ss. 4 (3) and 7 of the Hyderabad Assami Shikmis Act (No. 1 of 1354 Fasli).Considering the importance of the questions raised, I think it desirable that they are disposed of by a Bench.(2) I may also add that Sri Sivarama Sastry, the le...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1965AP288
ORDERSatyanarayana Raju, J.(1) This matter comes before us on a reference made by the First Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, under S. 133 of the Code of Civil Procedure.(2) The point which arises for decision in this reference is whether the Hyderabad Suits Against Government Act (V of 1320 Fasli) Hereinafter referred to as 'the Hyderabad Act' is void by reason of its repugnancy to the Code of Civil Procedure which was extended to the erstwhile State of Hyderabad in April 1951.(3) For a better appreciation of the point in controversy, we may, at the outset, briefly mention the admitted facts.On July 23, 1953, the plaintiff gave notice to the former Government of Hyderabad, under S. 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and on November 23, 1953 instituted the suit against them for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,00,000 by way of damages for an alleged breach of the contract entered into by him with the Government. The Government filed their written statement raising various ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1965AP272
Narasimham, J. (1) This is a petition filed by the appellant in C. C. C. A. No. 30 of 1959, an appeal against the judgment of the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O. S. No. 92 of 1958.(2) The petition raises the question whether the Advocates' fees have to be taxed under the Rules made by the Hyderabad High court under Sec. 27 of the Legal Practitioners Act, 1879 (No. XVIII of 1879) or the rules framed under the said provision of the Act by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.(3) It is an undisputed fact that the suit was filed on 23-11-1953 and court-fee was paid under the Hyderabad Court-Fees Act, 1324 Fasli (No. VI of 1324 Fasli). The suit was decreed in part, and the defendant preferred the appeal to the High Court on 1959 and paid court-fee on the memorandum of appeal under the Hyderabad Court-fees Act. The appeal was disposed by us on 8-11-1962 allowing the appeal and remanding the suit for fresh disposal, allowing an amendment of the additional written statem...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1966AP137; 1966CriLJ512
ORDERAnantanarayana Ayyar, J.1. The petitioner gave a complaint to the Police. After investigation, the Police filed a charge-sheet. The Assistant Sessions Judge, Guntur tried the accused. Ultimately, he convicted the accused and sentenced him. At the trial, the petitioner complainant deposed as P.W. 1. The accused filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Guntur and were completely acquitted by him. Thereupon, the petitioner filed Criminal Revision Petition in this court praying for revision of the lower appellate Court's judgment of acquittal. Along with the revision petition, he filed a certified copy of the judgment of the lower appellate court but he did not file a certified copy of the judgment of the trial court. When the office required him to file a certified copy duly stamped, he came forward with a contention that he was not bound to furnish a certified copy. Therefore, the office put up the matter before me for hearing.2. The petitioner produced a copy of the trial court's...
Tag this Judgment!