{"id":230247,"date":"1954-02-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1954-02-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954"},"modified":"2016-08-18T21:49:34","modified_gmt":"2016-08-18T16:19:34","slug":"the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954","title":{"rendered":"The Rajahmundry Electric … vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
The Rajahmundry Electric … vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1954 AIR 251, \t\t 1954 SCR 779<\/div>\n
Author: S R Das<\/div>\n
Bench: Mahajan, Mehar Chand (Cj), Mukherjea, B.K., Das, Sudhi Ranjan, Bose, Vivian, Hasan, Ghulam<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nTHE RAJAHMUNDRY ELECTRIC SUPPLYCORPORATION LTD.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE STATE OF ANDHRA.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n10\/02\/1954\n\nBENCH:\nDAS, SUDHI RANJAN\nBENCH:\nDAS, SUDHI RANJAN\nMAHAJAN, MEHAR CHAND (CJ)\nMUKHERJEA, B.K.\nBOSE, VIVIAN\nHASAN, GHULAM\n\nCITATION:\n 1954 AIR  251\t\t  1954 SCR  779\n CITATOR INFO :\n D\t    1962 SC1753\t (2,4)\n RF\t    1968 SC1138\t (23)\n R\t    1970 SC 564\t (40)\n RF\t    1977 SC1825\t (54)\n E\t    1980 SC1955\t (16)\n\n\nACT:\n     Madras  Electricity  Supply  Undertakings\t(Acquisition)\n Act--(Madras  Act XLIII of 1949)--Validity of--No  entry  in\n the   three  Legislative  Lists  of  seventh\tschedule   of\n Government of India Act, 1935.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n   The\t  Madras    Electricity\t    Supply     Undertakings\n(Acquisition) Act (Madras Act XLIII of 1949) was beyond\t the\nlegislative   competency of the Madras\tLegislature  because\nthere  was  no\tentry  in ,any of the  three  Lists  of\t the\nSeventh\t  Schedule   of\t the  Government   of\tIndia\tAct,\n1935,  relating to compulsory acquisition of any  commercial\nor   industrial\t undertaking  although\ts. 299\t(2)  clearly\ncontemplated   a law authorising compulsory acquisition\t for\npublic\tpurposes of a commercial or industrial\tundertaking.\n      State  of\t Bihar\tv.  Maharajadhiraja  Sir  Kameshwar\nSingh<\/a> ([1952] S.C.R. 889) referred to.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil   Appeal No. 72 of 1952.
\n    Appeal  under  articles 132 (1) and 133 (1) (b)  of\t the
\nConstitution of India from the Judgment and Order dated\t the
\n27th  April,   1951,  of the High  Court  of  Judicature  at
\nMadras\t(Rajamannar  C.J. and  Satyanarayana  Rao   J.)\t  in
\nCivil  Miscellaneous  Petition No. 4697 of 1951.
\n    M.K.  Nambiyar (U. Sethumadhava Rao, with him)  for\t the
\nappellant.\n<\/p>\n
M. Seshachalapathi for the respondent.\n<\/p>\n
    V.K.T. Chari, Advocate-General of Madras (Porus A. Mehta
\nand V.V. Raghavan, with him)  for fife Intervener (State  of
\nMadras).\n<\/p>\n
    1954.  February   10.  The Judgment\t of  the  Court\t was
\ndelivered by
\n    DAs\t J.–This is an appeal\tarising out’ of\t a  judgment
\ndelivered   on\tthe  27th April, 1951, by a  Bench  o15\t the
\nMadras\tHigh  Court  in C.M.P. No.  4697 of 1951 filed under
\narticle\t 226015 the Constitution for the issue of a writ  of
\ncertiorari or other appropriate\t writ to  call
\n780<\/span>
\nfor the records and quash the order of the Government passed
\nunder\tsection\t 4(1)  of  the\tMadras\tAct  XLIII  of\t1949
\ndeclaring   the\t undertaking  of the appellant\t company  to
\nvest in the Government.\n<\/p>\n
  The appellant company was formed and registered under\t the
\nIndian Companies Act in 1924 with the object, inter alia, of
\ngenerating  and\t supplying  electrical ,energy to the public
\nin  Rajahmundry.  In 1949 the  Madras\tLegislature   passed
\nthe\t Madras\t     Electricity    Supply\tUndertakings
\n(Acquisition)\tAct,  1949.  The Act received the assent  of
\nthe  Governor-General  on the 18th January,  1950,  and\t was
\npublished  in the Official Gazette  on the   24th   January,
\n1950.  Upon  the Constitution  of India coming into force on
\nthe  26th  January,  1950,  the Act  was  submitted  to\t the
\nPresident  for\this  certification and on  the\t12th  April,
\n1950,  the President certified\tthat the Act should  not  be
\ncalled\tin  question  m\t any court on  the  ground  that  it
\ncontravened  the provisions of clause (2) of article  31  or
\nit-contravened\t the  provisions  of  sub-section  (2)\t  of
\nsection\t 299 of the Government of India Act,  1935.   By  an
\norder  in  writing  made on the 2nd  September,\t  1950,\t the
\nGovernment  of Madras acting under section 4(1) of  the\t Act
\ndeclared  that\tthe  undertaking of  the  appellant  company
\nshould\tvest  in  the  Government  on  the  date   specified
\ntherein.  Under\t the proviso to section\t 4(1) the Government
\nfrom time to time postponed the date of vesting and the\t 2nd
\nApril,\t1951,  was  the last-extended date  fixed  for\tsuch
\nvesting.    On\t the   29th   March,  1951,  the   appellant
\ncompany filed  C.M.P.  No. 4697 of 1951,  under article\t 226
\nfor quashing the order\tof the Government.\n<\/p>\n
    Shortly stated the contentions of the. appellant  before
\nthe High Court were that the Act was ultra vires in that (1)
\nit  was\t beyond\t the legislative competency  of\t the  Madras
\nLegislature   to  enact\t it,   (2) it  was  not\t enacted  to
\nsubserve  any  public  purpose,\t and  (3)  the\tcompensation
\nprovided for was illusory.  The High Court repelled each and
\nall of the aforesaid contentions of the\t appellant  company.
\nIt   held   that   the\tlegislation  was  with\trespect\t  to
\nelectricity under  entry 31 of\tthe
\n781<\/span>
\nconcurrent   list  in  the   seventh   Schedule\t   to\t the
\nGovernment  of\tIndia Act, 1935, and was not  a\t legislation
\nwith  respect to corporations  under entry 33 in list  I  as
\ncontended  by  the  appellant  and  that,   therefore,\t the
\nMadras\t Legislature   was  competent  to   enact   it.\t  It
\nfurther held that  the Act having received  the\t certificate
\nof  the President the challenge based on an alleged  absence
\nof   public   purpose\tor  the\t illusory  nature   of\t the
\ncompensation   was  shut out and could\tnot be\traised.\t The
\nHigh  Court,  however, held that certain sections  and\trule
\n19(2)  of the Rules framed under the Act were  invalid\t and
\nsubject\t   thereto   dismissed\t the   application  of\t the
\nappellant   company.  The  High\t Court granted leave to\t the
\nappellant  company to appeal before this court.\t The  appeal
\nhas now come up for heating before us.\n<\/p>\n
    Learned  counsel appearing in support of the appeal\t has
\nnot  pressed  before us the contention raised  in  the\tHigh
\nCourt  as to the absence of public purpose or  the  illusory
\nnature\t of the compensation  provided\tby  the Act. He\t has
\nconfined his submissions to the question of the\t legislative
\ncompetency of the Madras Legislature to enact this piece  of
\nlegislation.  In the High Court the contest  centered  round
\nthe   question\t whether the Act was a law with\t respect  to
\nelectricity under entry 31 of the concurrent  list  or\twith
\nrespect\t to corporations under entry 33 in list I. The\tHigh
\nCourt  held that the Act was,  in pith and substance, a\t law
\nwith  respect  to electricity  and was,\t  therefore,  within
\nthe   legislative   competency\t  of   the\t  Provincial
\nLegislature.  In his arguments\tbefore us   learned  counsel
\ncontended  that the act is in substance and effect  one\t for
\nthe  acquisition  of  an  electrical undertaking   and,\t  as
\nsuch,  is ultra vires because-\n<\/p>\n
  (a)  the  acquisition\t of  an\t electrical undertaking\t was
\nnot  a\tlegislative item in any of the three  lists  in\t the
\nseventh\t schedule  to the Government of India Act, 1935, and\n<\/p>\n
  (b) in     so\t far   as  it  relates\tto  the\t acquisition
\nof  an\telectrical  undertaking\t of  a\tcorporation  it is a
\nlaw with respect to corporations under entry 33 in list I.\n<\/p>\n
782<\/span><\/p>\n
In  our opinion this appeal can be disposed of on the  first
\nof the two grounds mentioned above.\n<\/p>\n
    Turning   to  the Act it will be noticed that  the\tlong
\ntitle\tof  the Act is\t“an Act to make provision  for\t the
\nacquisition  of\t undertakings  in the  Province\t  of  Madras
\nsupplying    electricity.”   The   preamble   recites\t the
\nexpediency  of\tmaking\tProvision “for\tthe  acquisition  of
\nundertakings   in   the\t  Province  of\tMadras\t engaged  in
\nsupplying  electricity.”  Section 1 gives  the short  title,
\nextent\tand  commencement  of  the  Act.  Section  2  is   a
\ndefinition   section.  Section\t3  provides  that  the\t Act
\nshall  apply  to  all undertakings  of\tlicensees  including
\ncertain\t   undertakings\t therein   mentioned.\t Section   4
\nempowers   the\tGovernment to take over any  undertaking  by
\nmaking\tan order in writing declaring that such\t undertaking
\nshall  vest  in\t the  Government  on   a   specified   date.
\nSection\t  5  provides\tfor   compensation   payable  to   a
\nlicensee who is not a local authority. The section gives  an
\noption\tto  the licensee to claim compensation\ton  one\t  of
\nthree\tbases\t therein   specified. Section 6\t deals\twith
\ncompensation  payable  where  the  licensee   is  a    local
\nauthority.    Section\t 7   specifies the   properties\t  or
\nassets\t which\t will  vest  according\taS  compensation  is
\nclaimed under one basis or another. Section  8 provides\t for
\nthe   appointment  of  a  sole representative to act as\t the
\nsole  and  accredited  representative  of  the\tlicensee  in
\nconnection  with the handing over of the   undertaking\t and
\nperforming   on\t behalf\t of  the  licensee   the   functions
\nthereinafter\t specified.    The  choice   of\t  basis\t  of
\ncompensation is to be made within one month under section  9
\nand  such choice once intimated to the Government is not  to
\nbe  open   to revision except  with   the   concurrence\t  of
\nthe   Government. Section  10  authorises  the\t Government,
\nin   case  the licensee has disposed of any  of\t the  assets
\notherwise  than in the normal course of events causing\tloss
\nto  the Government as succeeding owners, to deduct from\t the
\ncompensation payable  to the licensee  an amount which\tthey
\nconsider  to be\t the  loss   sustained\tby  them. Section 11
\nprescribes the various deductions which the Government shall
\nbe  entitled to make from the compensation   payable   under
\nthe  Act.  The-manner of
\n783<\/span>
\npayment\t or deposit of compensation is laid down in  section\n<\/p>\n
12.   Section  13  permits  the\t Government   to  repay\t all
\nloans,\t debentures,  mortgages\t and  the  like\t outstanding
\non the vesting\tdate at any time before the time fixed\t for
\nrepayment.  Section 14 is the arbitration section.   Section
\n15   provides  for   the   termination\t of  the    managing
\nagency.\t    Section   16   authorises\tthe  Government\t  to
\nterminate  the\tservices of any person on the staff  of\t the
\nlicensee  immediately before the vesting ‘date. Section\t  17
\nrequires  all  licensees  to prepare and hand  over  to\t the
\nGovernment a complete inventory of all the assets.   Section
\n18   gives  power of entry to the Government or any  officer
\nauthorised  by the Government upon any land or\tpremises  in
\nthe  possession\t of the licensee.   Section   19  prescribes
\npenalties for various defaults\ttherein\t specified.  Section
\n20  makes   certain  officers of a company  liable  for\t the
\noffence\t committed  by\tthe  company.\tSection\t  21   gives
\nprotection   against suit or prosecution for  anything\tdone
\nin  good faith under any rule or order made under  the\tAct.
\nSection\t  22  confers\t rule-making\tpower\t  on\t the
\nGovernment. Section  23\t provides  that\t the  provisions  of
\ncertain\t Acts  in so far as they are inconsistent  with\t the
\nprovisions  of\tthis Act shall have no effect.\t Section  24
\ngives  power to the Government to do anything which  appears
\nto  them  necessary  for  the  purpose\t of   removing\t any
\ndifficulty.  From the above summary it will be noticed\tthat
\nthe  Act  does\tnot purport to make any\t provision  for\t the
\ngranting of licenses or maintenance of works for  generating
\nor   transmitting   energy  or\t for   supplying  electrical
\nenergy\tas  one would expect to find in a law  dealing\twith
\nelectricity nor does  the Act purport to make any  provision
\nfor   the   incorporation,   regulation\t or  winding  up  of
\ntrading\t corporations.\tOn the contrary,  it  is  abundantly
\nclear  from the long title,  the preamble and  the  sections
\nthat  it  is,  in  pith\t and  substance, nothing but an\t Act
\nto provide for the acquisition of electrical undertakings.
\n    Section  299 (2)  of the Government of India Act,  1935,
\nprovided   that\t neither  the  Federal\tnor   a\t  Provincial
\nLegislature would have power to make any law authorising the
\ncompulsory acquisition for public purposes
\n784<\/span>
\nof  any land or any commercial or industrial undertaking  or
\nany  interest in or in any  company  owning  any  commercial
\nor   industrial\t undertaking  unless  the law provided\t for
\nthe   payment  of compensation\tfor  the property  acquired.
\nCompulsory  acquisition\t of  property  is   undoubtedly\t  an
\nimportant sovereign right of the State but this right has to
\nbe  exercised  under  a law. The legislative power   of\t the
\nState was distributed by sections  99  and  100 amongst\t the
\nFederal\t  Legislature and the Provincial   Legislatures\t  in
\nthe  manner provided’ in the  several  lists  set  forth  in
\nthe   Seventh  Schedule to the Act.  Section  100 read\twith
\nentry  9 in list II authorised the  Provincial\t Legislature
\nto  make  a  law with  respect\tto compulsory acquisition of
\nland. There was no entry in any of the three lists  relating
\nto   compulsory\t  acquisition\tof   any    commercial\t  or
\nindustrial  undertaking, although section 299  (2)   clearly
\ncontemplated   a law  authorising   compulsory\t acquisition
\nfor   public   purposes\t of  a\tcommercial   or\t  industrial
\nundertaking.\tThe    acquisition  of\ta   commercial\t  or
\nindustrial  undertaking not being the subject-matter of\t any
\nentry  in any of the  three legislative lists,\tneither\t the
\nFederal\t Legislature nor the Provincial\t Legislature   could
\nenact  a  law with respect to compulsory  acquisition  of  a
\ncommercial  or industrial  undertaking.\t Under\tsection 104,
\nhowever,    the\t  Governor-General,   in   his\t  individual
\ndiscretion,   could,  by  public    notification,    empower
\neither\tthe Federal Legislature or a Provincial\t Legislature
\nto enact a law with respect to any matter not enumerated  in
\nany  of the  lists in the  seventh  schedule to the Act.  It
\nis,  therefore,\t clear that although  Parliament   expressly
\nentrusted  the\tProvincial  Legislature with power to make a
\nlaw with respect to compulsory\tacquisition of land  it\t did
\nnot   straightaway  grant any power, either to\tthe  Federal
\nLegislature  or\t the Provincial Legislature, to make  a\t law
\nwith  respect to compulsory  acquisition of a commercial  or
\nindustrial undertaking\tbut  left  it  to  the\t  discretion
\nof    the   Governor-General  to  empower  either   of\t the
\nLegislatures  to  enact such a law. There is  no  suggestion
\nthat  the  Governor-General   had,   in\t exercise   of\t his
\ndiscretionary powers  under  section  104,  authorised\t the
\nMadras
\n785<\/span>
\nLegislature to enact  the impugned  Act and, therefore,\t the
\nAct was, prima facie, beyond the  legislative competency  of
\nthe Madras Legislature.\n<\/p>\n
    The learned Advocate-General of Madras urges that  there
\nwas   implicit\tin  every entry\t in  the  legislative  lists
\nin the Seventh\tSchedule  to the  Government  of India\tAct,
\n1935,  an  inherent power to make a law with  respect  to  a
\nmatter ancillary  or  incidental  to  the subject-matter  of
\neach   entry.  His  argument  is  that each  entry  in\t the
\nlist  carried with it an inherent power\t to provide for\t the
\ncompulsory  acquisition\t  of  any property,  land   or\t any
\ncommercial   or industrial undertaking, while making  a\t law
\nunder  such entry. It is quite\ttrue that  the\t powers\t  of
\neach   Legislature   to make  laws  with  respect   to\t the
\ndifferent   subjects assigned  to  it  by  the,\t appropriate
\nlist   were   to be regarded as wide and  plenary  and\talso
\ncovering   matters  incidental\t or   ancillary\t  to\tsuch
\nsubject-matter,\t but it is,  nevertheless,  clear  from\t the
\nprovision   of\tthe  Act that the power to make\t a  law\t for
\ncompulsory acquisition was, under entry 9 in list II,  given
\nonly  to  Provincial  Legislatures  and\t that\tsuch   power
\nof   the Provincial  Legislatures  was,\t under that   entry,
\nlimited\t to making a law for the compulsory  acquisition  of
\nland  only  and that  unless   the   Governor-General\tmade
\nan  .order under  section  104 of the  Act   the  Provincial
\nLegislatures  had no power to make a law for the  compulsory
\nacquisition  of any property  other than  land ,and that the
\nFederal\t Legislature  had  no power to\tmake  any  law\twith
\nrespect\t to the compulsory acquisition of any  property\t  at
\nall.  If the  argument of the learned Advocate-General\twere
\ncorrect\t  then\tentry 9 in list II ‘was wholly\t unnecessary
\nfor  under entry 21  in list II the Provincial\tLegislatures
\ncould  make a law for the compulsory  acquisition  of  land.
\nA  similar  argument was repelled  by  this  court  in\t the
\nState  of Bihar v. Maharajadhiraja Sir Kameshwar  Singh<\/a>(  ).
\nThe   matter   is placed beyond any doubt  or\tdispute\t  by
\nthe  provisions\t of section  127 of the Government of  India
\nAct, 1935,  which provided that\t the  Federal might,  if  it
\n,deemed\t it necessary to acquire any land situate in a
\n(1) [1952] S.C.R. 889.\n<\/p>\n
786<\/span><\/p>\n
Province  for  any  purpose connected  with  a\tmatter\twith
\nrespect\t to which the Federal Legislature had power to\tmake
\nlaws,  require the Province to acquire the land\t on   behalf
\nand at the expense of the Federation.  If  power’ inhered in
\nthe Federal Legislature to make a law for the acquisition of
\nany property for any purpose connected\twith a\tmatter\twith
\nrespect to which it had’ power to make laws then section 127
\nwould not have’ been  necessary\t at  all.  The\tabsence\t  of
\nany   entry  empowering any Legislature to  make  laws\twith
\nrespect\t to  compulsory\t acquisition of\t  a  commercial\t  or
\nindustrial undertaking and the provisions of section 127 to,
\nwhich reference has just been made make it abundantly  clear
\nthat  the  contentions\turged  by  the\t learned’  Advocate-
\nGeneral\t cannot\t possibly  be\tsustained.   In our opinion,
\ntherefore, it must be held that the Madras Legislature\t had
\nno  legislative\t   competency  to enact the  impugned\tlaw.
\nThis is\t sufficient to dispose of this appeal and it is\t not
\nnecessary to express any opinion, on the other points raised
\nin the court below.\n<\/p>\n
    The\t result,  therefore, is that this  appeal  must\t be’
\nallowed with costs both in the High Court as well as in this
\ncourt.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t  Appeal  allowed.\n<\/p>\n
Agent  for  the appellant: M.S.K. Aiyangar.
\nAgent  for  the\t respondent:  R.H.  Dhebar.\n<\/p>\n
Agent for the intervener: R.H. Dhebar.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India The Rajahmundry Electric … vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954 Equivalent citations: 1954 AIR 251, 1954 SCR 779 Author: S R Das Bench: Mahajan, Mehar Chand (Cj), Mukherjea, B.K., Das, Sudhi Ranjan, Bose, Vivian, Hasan, Ghulam PETITIONER: THE RAJAHMUNDRY ELECTRIC SUPPLYCORPORATION LTD. Vs. RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF ANDHRA. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-230247","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Rajahmundry Electric ... vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Rajahmundry Electric ... vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1954-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-18T16:19:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Rajahmundry Electric … vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954\",\"datePublished\":\"1954-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-18T16:19:34+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954\"},\"wordCount\":2486,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954\",\"name\":\"The Rajahmundry Electric ... vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1954-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-18T16:19:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Rajahmundry Electric … vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Rajahmundry Electric ... vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Rajahmundry Electric ... vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1954-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-18T16:19:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Rajahmundry Electric … vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954","datePublished":"1954-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-18T16:19:34+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954"},"wordCount":2486,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954","name":"The Rajahmundry Electric ... vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1954-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-18T16:19:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-rajahmundry-electric-vs-the-state-of-andhra-on-10-february-1954#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Rajahmundry Electric … vs The State Of Andhra on 10 February, 1954"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230247","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=230247"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230247\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=230247"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=230247"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=230247"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}