SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1963 Supreme(AP) 69

P.SATYANARAYANA RAJU, NARASIMHAM, GOPALA KRISHNAN NAIR
Sheik Hussain – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


SATYANARAYANA RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THESE petitions have been posted before a Full Bench because of a conflict of opinion between the decisions of two Division Benches of this Court, namely Ramamurthy Naidu v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1961 Andh Pra 344 and Narasimha Rao v. State of Madras (Now Andhra) (Unreported Judgment in W. P. 462 of 1953, D/- 29/07/1955 ).

( 2 ) ONE of these petitions, W. P. No. 84 of I960, was referred to a Division Bench by Mr. Justice Seshachalapathi. The Division Bench, consisting of Mr. Justice Jaganmohan Reddy and Mr. Justice Ananthanarayana Ayyar, referred that petition and the connected cases for the decision of a Full Bench.

( 3 ) THESE petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution, are for the issue of Writs of Certiorari to quash the orders of the State Government under the Motor Vehicles Act. All of them raise identical questions for determination.

( 4 ) IT is enough to set out the material facts in W. P. No. 84 of 1960. The petitioner therein is a transport operator having a stage carriage permit. On a check by the Sub-Inspector of Police on 9/06/1957, his vehicle was found to be overloaded. The Regional Transport Authority called for his explanat









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top