Dismissed¶23

M/S. Partani Dall Industries, R.R.Dist. v. Rep. by Its State Rep. Before Stat, Hyd.

Telangana HC25 Aug 2025TREVC/74/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal of tax revision for want of prosecution; petitioner unresponsive and lost interest in litigation; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed; TREVC No. 74 of 2009; Section 22(1) Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act 1957; Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad; T.A.No. 1441 of 2001; M/s Partani Dall Industries, Tandur, Ranga Reddy District; State of Andhra Pradesh; Telangana High Court Division Bench; decided 25/08/2025.

What did the court decide?

None. Tax revision case dismissed for want of prosecution; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, directed to stand closed. ¶23

M/S. Partani Dall Industries, R.R.Dist. Vs Rep. by Its State Rep. Before Stat, Hyd. — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD

¶2

MONDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

¶7

TAX REVISION CASE NO: 74 OF 2009

¶8

Tax Revision under Section 22 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 to revise the order dated 23 10.2008 in T.A.No. 1441 of 2001 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/s. Partani Dall lndustries, Tandur - 501 141 , Ranga Reddy District. Rep. by its Partner, [Vr. Jai Prakash Partani. ...PETITIONER AND

¶11

State of Andhra Pradesh. Rep. by^jts State Representative, before Sales Tax ...RESPONDENT Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad.

¶12

...RESPONDENT

¶13

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. TARUN CHADHA REPRESENTING SRI S. DWARAKANATH

¶14

Counsel for the Respondents:

¶15

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶16

THE HoNOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SANI KOSHI AND

¶17

IIHE HONOURABI-E SRI .ITISTICE ST]DDA LA CHAt-APATH I RAO

¶18

TREVC No.74 OF 2009

¶19

,ttrl)(;tvlEN t' '1tt'r llon hle Sri Justita l'.Sun Kttsh_r')

¶20

Mr.^-[-arun Chadha, learned counsel leprescnting

¶21

Mr. S. Du,araka,rath. learned counsel tbr the petitioncr. iubrnits that

¶22

in spite of be:;: efforts being rnade, the party is nol responding. It appcars that they have lost interest in the litigation ;rnd that the cause does not :;urvive.

¶23