Disposed

Church of South India Trust Association, Medak Diocese v. The Commissoner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Telangana HC4 Aug 2016CRP/1853/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In revision under Article 227, the court condensed stay of tax collection and directed payment of 25% demand in two 20-day instalments with automatic vacatur of stay upon failure.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed a stay of collection of tax at enhanced rate with direction to pay 25% of the demand in two instalments; failure to comply vacates the stay.

Church of South India Trust Association, Medak… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1853 OF 2016

¶2

O R D E R

¶3

This Revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order in I.A.No.156 of 2016 dated 08.03.2016 in M.A.No.57 of 2016 passed by the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad whereby the revision petitioner was directed to pay 25% of the demand notice dated 27.02.2016 to the credit of GHMC on or before 11.04.2016 while granting stay of collection of tax at enhanced rate making it clear that in the event of failure to deposit the amount, the stay shall automatically stands vacated.

¶4

In the present revision, no specific ground is raised to exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India, more particularly regarding excessive exercise of jurisdiction, exceeding the limits by trial Court to keep trial Court within the bounds while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India.

¶5

However, during hearing Sri V.Venkata Ramana, learned senior counsel for the petitioner sought for two monthly instalments for payment of 25% of the demanded amount as ordered by the trial Court. Sri P.Keshava Rao, learned Standing counsel for the respondents opposed the request of the counsel for the petitioner.

¶6

However, considering the quantum of the amount payable to the Corporation, I find that it is a fit case to grant two instalments of 20 days each from today i.e., the 1^st instalment shall be paid on or before 02.09.2016 and the 2^nd instalment shall be paid on or before 23.09.2016. In case, the petitioner fails to comply with the direction within the prescribed period, the stay shall stands vacated and the petitioner is not entitled to seek further extension for the reason that after obtaining order, four months has been elapsed.

¶7

With the above direction, the civil revision petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶8

_________________________________ M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY,J Date: 04.08.2016 Dv

¶9

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶10

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1852 OF 2016

¶11

Date: 04.08.2016

Church of South India Trust Association, Medak Diocese v. The Commissoner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Church of South India Trust Association, Medak Diocese v. The Commissoner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

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

Moheenddin Ahammad Vs D.Satyanarayana Reddy and 4 Others

Mattery Talsamma Vs Mattavarigudem Elementary School

Kondapalli Vasantha Kumari Vs Bommareddy Venkata Rami Reddy

J.Nagesh, Vs Smt G.Shanthi

T.Rama Mohana Rao and Another Vs T.v.Narasimha Rao and 3 Others

Murala Adinarayana Vs The State of Telangana