DCHL given 2 weeks time to respond in UII case........ HYDERABAD: Justice Vilas V Afzalpurkar of the AP high court on Monday gave two weeks time to Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd (DCHL) to respond to a winding up plea filed by United India Insurance Company, which wants the court to liquidate DCHL on the grounds that the latter failed to repay an amount of Rs 30 crore. According to Valluri Mohan Srinivas, counsel for the insurance company, United India Insurance, bought non-convertible debentures worth Rs 30 crore from DCHL through IDFC and despite the passage of the maturity date, the amounts that were payable to them were not paid so far. Following the bouncing of the cheques given by the DCHL management, we have launched separate proceedings under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act. We want the HC to appoint a liquidator in accordance with the companies Act and direct the winding up of the default company, the counsel said. Plea on Srikrishna Committee report dismissed The AP high court on Monday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that questioned the action of the Centre in withholding Chapter 8 of the Justice Srikrishna Committee report and also not providing a copy of the report to public representatives. The Centre had appointed the Justice Srikrishna Committee for consultations in the wake of the separate Telangana state agitation. After concluding its consultations, the committee placed the report before the Centre and requested it not to make public Chapter 8 of the report as it contains material with regard to law and order and internal security dimensions. Kesari Haranath, secretary to Forum for Better Vikrama Simhapuri Society of Nellore, moved the PIL by urging the court to direct the Union home secretary to furnish a copy of the report including the report of Chapter 8 to MPs, MLAs and MLCs to enable them to have a fair discussion on the issue in both Parliament and the state assembly on separate Telangana. He told the court that a single judge of the high court had directed the Centre in March 2011 to make public the contents of Chapter 8. He contended that it was necessary to discuss the contents of Chapter 8 in the wake of the Seemandhra peoples opposition to the bifurcation of AP. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice KC Bhanu of the court made it clear that it was the discretion of the Centre to make public Chapter 8 and the court cannot intervene in the realm of the Centre. The bench also said that the order of the single judge will not have any binding on the bench and that it was for the Centre to decide any further action on the report. In August 2011, a division bench of the high court stayed the single judge order as the Centre contended that the contents would not be made public since it was a privileged document under Sections 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872. HC refuses to intervene in LPG subsidy case A division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice KC Bhanu of the AP high court on Monday refused to entertain a PIL seeking a direction to the Centre to Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) to revert back to the old practice of supplying subsidized LPG cylinders to all the consumers without insisting on Aadhaar card in view of the Supreme Court order dated October 8, 2013. Mohammed Abdul Gaffar, advocate of the city, moved the plea stating that the apex court has recently ruled that the Aadhaar card, being issued by the Unique Identification Authority of India ( UIDAI), was not mandatory for availing any government services or schemes and that nobody should be deprived of any such facilities for want of the card. The chief justice told the petitioner to approach the apex court as the matter is already pending before it and in view of the pendency of the litigation, the high court cannot interfere in the matter and they are inclined to dismiss the PIL. When the petitioner urged the court to refer its case to the Supreme Court, the bench expressed its displeasure for wasting the court time and dismissed the PIL by imposing Rs 500 cost on the petitioner. Case on RTC postponed The AP high court on Monday directed the state road transport corporation (APSRTC) to file a counter affidavit in five weeks justifying its decision to collect higher charges from passengers for operating special bus services during jataras, festivals and other occasions. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice KC Bhanu was dealing with a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Hyderabad resident Rama Raju, who sought the courts direction to the corporation to follow normal ticket charging system even during festival season. The petitioners counsel alleged that APSRTC has been collecting higher charges up to a maximum of one and half times of the normal fare for special bus services operated during festive seasons etc. The corporation collects higher charges which is 150% more than the normal fare from the passengers in the guise of special services. He urged the court to declare the decision of the corporation to collect higher charges as illegal and issue a direction to the RTC to follow normal ticket charging system in the interest of the public. The bench then directed the corporation to file its counter affidavit in the case justifying its decision to collect higher charges and adjourned the case hearing by five weeks.TOI
Posted on: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 09:40:52 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015