Telangana High Court Judgments — 2015

The High Court held that the petitioners had taken inconsistent stands regarding their possession of the property, first claiming purchase and later tenancy. This vacillation of stance, coupled with the lack of clear evidence for sale or tenancy, led to the dismissal of the writ petition.

The High Court held that the Board of Revenue's order allowing the Collector to review the Additional Collector's lease renewal order was invalid because the Collector was not the competent authority to seek such a review. Consequently, the State's petition was dismissed, and the individual's petition was allowed.

The Tribunal held that a provision for dividend is not a declaration of dividend. Dividend declaration is a decision of the Board and shareholders, and tax was paid within the prescribed time after actual declaration.

The High Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the trial court's judgment. The court found that the plaintiff failed to perform his part of the contract within the stipulated time and did not provide convincing reasons for the delay.

The Tribunal correctly established the accident occurred due to negligent driving but awarded a meager compensation. The High Court enhanced the compensation by recalculating the income, adding future prospects, and applying the correct multiplier for loss of dependency.

The High Court held that the multiplier of 14 should be applied instead of 11, considering the deceased's age. It also directed the addition of 25% towards future prospects and enhanced amounts for conventional heads.

The High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Insurance Company, confirming the awards and decrees passed by the lower tribunal. The court ordered the Insurance Company to pay the balance awarded amount within one month.

The tribunal dismissed the appeal based on the CBDT circular which stipulated that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 20 lakhs should not be filed before the ITAT. The current appeal's tax effect was below this revised limit.

The Tribunal held that the royalty paid on the basis of production and sale of products is revenue expenditure. The High Court agreed with the Tribunal's decision.

The High Court dismissed the appeals as not pressed, following the CBDT Circular which stipulated that appeals with a tax effect below a certain limit should not be filed. Substantial questions of law were left open for future proceedings.

The High Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 48,29,000/-, considering future prospects and conventional heads as per Supreme Court judgments. The court allowed the appeal, directing the respondents to pay the enhanced amount with interest.

The High Court held that the rash and negligent driving of the Army vehicle driver was sufficiently proved by the charge-sheet and the evidence of the eye-witness. The court recalculated the compensation by considering the deceased's income tax returns, voter ID for age, and applying appropriate multipliers and future prospects.