Dismissed

Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Apr 2024WP/41846/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited challenging an NDPS summons as infructuous upon submission that the cause of action has ceased to exist. No order as to costs was made.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, stood closed.

Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Vs The… — Money Laundering | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL

¶3

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 41846 OF 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Wockhardt Towers, Level 3, C- 2, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai -400051, Rep. By its General Power of Attorney, Sri.Velpula Muralidhar^{s/oRadhakrishna.}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by itsPrincipal Secretary, Home department Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, GuhturDistrict.

¶12

The Station House Officer, Hukumpeta Police Station,Vishakapa^tnam District.

¶13

Pentakota Varalkshmi, W/o China Appala Naidu, R/o Vakapalli village,Devarapalli P.O., Vishakapatnam District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction preferably one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring that the impugned summons to

¶16

appear dated 16-11-2016 issued by the court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge cum Special Judge to try offences under NDPS Act, Vishakapatnam in S.C.No.20/2016 to the Managing Director of the Petitioner Company though he is no way connected to the case, as illegal, arbitrary and beyond jurisdiction of the said court and is violative of^theArt.21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same.

¶17

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 51589 OF 2016)

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the attendance of the Managing Director of the petitioner company before the court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge cum Special Judge to try offences under NDPS Act, Vishakapatnam in S.C.No.20/2016 in pursuance of the summons to appear dated 16-112016, on 02/12/2016 and any subsequent dates pending disposal of the main writ petition in the interest of justice.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner; SRI G.PURUSHOTHAM REDDY

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: GP FOR HOME

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI C.H.MURALI KRISHNA

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

AF’HC010026662016

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶25

[3310]

¶26

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶27

TUESDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶28

PRESENT

¶29

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶30

WRIT PETITION NO: 41846/2016

¶31

Between;

¶32

...PETITIONER Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited,

¶33

AND

¶34

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶35

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶36

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶37

1, G PURUSHOTHAM REDDY

¶38

Counsel for the Respondent(S);

¶39

1.3119/C H MURALl KRISHNA

¶40

2.GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶41

The Court made the following:

¶42

ORDER;-

¶43

learned counsel, representing Sri G. Ms. Sri M. Rajeev Kumar, counsel for the petitioner on record. Purushotham Reddy, learned Writ Petition does not survive, and submits that the cause in the present it has become infructuous.

¶44

¶45

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing^forthe official respondents and Sri Ch. Murali Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.3 is present.

¶46

Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as Infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶47

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶48

Sd/- M. PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

One CC to SRI G.PURUSHOTHAM REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶53

Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶54

One CC to SRI C.H.MURALI KRISHNA, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two C.D Copies MBT

HIGH COURT

DATED:16/04/2024

ORDER

WP.No.41846 of 2016

g 05 FEB 2025 ?
^ . Current ;>ecuon

¶60

DISMISSING THE W.P

¶61

AS INFRUCTUOUS

¶62

WITHOUT COSTS

Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. P.v.P.Sai Arun, Vs The Station House Officer

M.Khadharun Bee at Muni D/o. Wahed Vali, Vs Rushikesh, Circle Inspector of Police, Mulakacheruvu Circle

Vallurupalli Satyanarayana, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chennareddigari Janardhan Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kocherla Chiranjeevi, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Tirumalasetty Padma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh