Disposed

Christain Medical Centre, v. The Pithapuram Municipal Council

Telangana HC19 Apr 2007WP/6093/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the illegality of a tax notice, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh directed the respondent municipality to file a counter-affidavit, stayed recovery operations conditionally upon the petitioner paying tax arrears for the last three years.

What did the court decide?

Stay on recovery of amounts under impugned notices, conditional upon payment of the petitioner's tax dues for the last three years.

Christain Medical Centre, Vs The Pithapuram… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

¶3

TUESDAY THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND SIX

¶5

PRESENT :

¶6

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE :BILAL NAZKI

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE : G.CHANDRAIAH

¶9

WRIT PETITION No. 6093 of 2006

¶10

Between:

¶11

Christian Medical Centre, rep by its Medical Officer In-Charge, Pithapuram, East Godavari District.

¶12

…Petitioner

¶13

AND

¶14

The Pithapuram Municipal Council, Rep by its Commissioner, Pithapuram, E.G. District.

¶15

…Respondent

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein, the High Court will be pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the special notice No. 43713, dt. 23.2.2005 and consequential demand notice dt. 5.10.2005 issued by the respondent Municipality herein for the property bearing Door No.1-3-17, Agraharam, Pithapuram, E.G. District as illegal and void and direct the respondent Municipality herein to desist from enforcing the same

¶17

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed therein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V.L.N. Gopala Krishna Murthy. Advocate for the petitioner and of Sri S. Nageswara Reddy Advocate for the Respondent

¶18

The Court made the following

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

“Mr. S. Nageswara Reddy Advocate , takes notice on behalf of the Respondent.

¶21

Counter in Two Weeks.

¶22

In the meantime, the recovery of the amounts through the impugned notices is stayed subject to payment of tax by the petitioner of the last three years i.e, 2002-2003 , 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 , within a period of Two Weeks.”

¶23

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶24

// TRUE COPY // for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶25

¶26

1. The Commissioner, Pithapuram Municipal Council, Pithapuram, E.G.

¶27

District.

¶28

2. One CC to Sri V.L.N. Gopala Krishna Murthy, Advocate (OPUC)

¶29

3. Two Spare Copies

Skm

HIGH COURT

BN,J & GC,J

DATED: 04-04-2006

¶34

NOTE: COUNTER IN TWO WEEKS

¶35

ORDER

¶36

W.P.NO. 6093 OF 2006

¶37

DIRECTION

¶38

Skm Drafted on: 05-04-2006

¶39

HIGH COURT

¶40

BN,J & GC,J

¶41

DATED: 04-04-2006

¶42

NOTE: COUNTER IN TWO WEEKS

¶43

ORDER

¶44

W.P.NO. 6093 OF 2006

¶45

DIRECTION

Christain Medical Centre, v. The Pithapuram Municipal Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Christain Medical Centre, v. The Pithapuram Municipal Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Koganti Venkata Ramaiah, 31-16-35, Machavaram Down Vs Commercial tax Officer, Seetharamapuram

The Assistant Controller, Vs The Income Tax Appealloate Tribunal

S.Muralidhar Rao Vs The Secretary Regional Transport Authority

Mohd.Abdul Qader, Vs Deputy Transport Commissioner and Secretary

Thanneeru Lakshmi Suresh babu Vs The Commercial Tax Ofifcer, Kavali circle

Christian Medical Centre, Vs The Pithapuram Municipal Council