Orissa Court February 1958 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
ShamsuddIn Khan and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori143; 24(1958)CLT412; [1958]33ITR733(Orissa)
Narasimham, C.J. 1. These two S. J. Cs. were heard analogously and will be dealt with in one judgment.2. The two cases arise out of a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Branch, stating the following case for the opinion of this Court:'Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the tax shall be levied and recoverable at the maximum rate upon the income determined under Section 23 (3)'.3. The facts found by the Tribunal are as follows:One Haji Altaf Khan of Cuttack executed a Wakf deed dated 24-2-1944, creating a religious endowment in the name of Sayed Mohammed Taki-Oli Allah Pir Saheb transferring all his properties to the said Endowment and appointing himself as the first Motwali. He directed that out of the income of the Wakf property arrangement should be made for reading quuran on every Friday, on every day during the month of Ramzan and other auspicious days, for offering prayers to God, and also for giving alms and money to the poor.He further dir...
Sri Surendra Mohanty Vs. Sri Nabakrishna Choudhury and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-26-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori168; 1958CriLJ1055
R.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a proceeding for contempt started against the former Chief Minister of Orissa, Sri Naba Krishna Choudhury in respect of a speech made by him in the Orissa Legislative Assembly on 8-3-1956. An extract from the speech was published in a local daily known as 'Matrubhumi' on 10-3-1956. The Editor and the Printer and Publisher of the said daily were also called upon to show cause why they may not be committed for contempt, but they have both tendered an unqualified apology.2. In October 1953 a Division Bench of this Court, (Panigrahi C. J. and Mohapatra J) in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by one of the Zammdars of Ganjam district delivered judgment holding that the survey made in Ganjam District was not authorised by law inasmuch as the proper notification under the Madras Survey and Boundaries Act of 1923 was not issued, and also gave consequential reliefs to the applicant. This judgment was reported in Mohan Prasad Singh Deo v. ...
A. Mahalakshmi and ors. Vs. Pammi Garama
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori139
ORDERS. Barman, J. 1. This revision is directed against an order of the Munsif, Berhampur, in Title Suit No. 224 of 1954 holding that the plaintiff is not precluded from raising the question of title in this suit and the suit is not barred by res judicata.2. The matter arose in this way: In 1949 the plaintiff, opposite party in the present revision petition, filed a suit being T.S. No. 151/49 (60/50 B.D.M.O.) hereinafter referred to as the first instituted suit, in the Court of the Munsif, Berhampur, for among other reliefs, permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from doing certain acts as stated in the plaint of that suit.3. The following issues, amongst others, were raised in the said first instituted suit:'1. Whether the plaintiff succeeded to the suit schedule properties as the sole owner and has been in enjoyment and possession of the same; 2. Whether the suit properties are the Stridhan properties of late Akkamma and devolved upon the defendants and whether the defendan...
Prananath Patnaik Vs. Banamali Patnaik
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-19-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori228
P.V.B. Rao, J.1. This appeal is against the order of the Election Tribunal (Mr. T. V. Rao, District Judge Puri) passed on a petition filed under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, (hereinafter called the Act) by a defeated candidate, Shri Banamali Patnaik for the Orissa Legislative Assembly from the Khurda Constituency during the elections held in 1957 praying to declare the election of the returned candidate Shri Prananath Patnaik as void.2. The Election Tribunal by its order dated 20th November, 1957 declared the election of Shri Prananath Patnaik to the Orissa Legislative Assembly to be void on account of the corrupt practice committed by him under Section 123, Clause (4) of the Act and disqualified him from standing as a candidate for election to the House of Parliament or the State Legislative Assembly for a period of six years.3. The Respondent-Petitioner was a candidate set up by the Congress Party while the Appellant-Opposite Party was set up by the Commu...
Arjun Jena and anr. Vs. Brahmananda Pani and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-19-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori253; 24(1958)CLT287
S. Barman, J. 1. This is an application under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code for revision directed against an order of the Additional District Judge, Cuttack, setting aside the order of the learned Munsif, 2nd Court, Cuttack, directing the proparties of the defendants up to the value of Rs. 500/- to be kept under attachment until further orders. 2. The facts shortly stated are as follows: The petitioners in the present application as plaintiffs Drought a suit against the opposite parties being T. S. No. 275 of 1953 in the Court of the Munsif, 2nd Court, Cuttack for declaration of their title and confirmation of possession and also for permanent injunction against the defendants-opposite parties restraining them from interfering with the possession of the petitioners. On 5-11-1953, on the application of the plaintiffs-petitioners the trial Court passed an interim order of injunction against the opposite parties restraining them from harvesting the paddy crops standing on the di...
The State Vs. K. Lachman Murty and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-11-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori204; 1958CriLJ1074
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Koraput-Jeypore-recommending the setting aside of an order of acquittal passed by(1) Sri B. C. Mohanty, Stationary Sub-Magistrate of Gunupur in G. R. Case No. 77 of 1956 and (2) Sri P. Jena, Stationary Sub-Magistrate of Nowrangpur in G. R. Case No. 313 of 1956.2. G. R. Case No. 77 of 1956 in the Court of the Stationary Sub-Magistrate of Gunupur against opposite party Kengua Lachman Murty was initiated on the basis of a charge sheet submitted by the Officer-in-charge of Gunupur P. S. under Sections 279 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation was that on the 14-5-1956 the opposite party drove his cycle in a rash and negligent manner and ran over one Trinath Bouri (P. W. 2) and thereby fractured his leg.The trying Magistrate of Gunupur, on 6-8-1956 allowed the offence under Section 338, Indian Penal Code to be compounded and acquitted the accused of that offence, under Section 345(1) of the Criminal Procedu...
Surendra Nath Satpathy Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-04-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori194; 1958CriLJ1071
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J. 1. This is a petition for quashing a criminal case pending against the petitioner in the Court of the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Baripada.2. The petitioner is a member of the Orissa Administrative Service and was working as Treasury Officer at Baripada in January 1957. On 4-1-1957, a remittance of Rupees 1,10,000/- in a sealed box was received at Baripada District Treasury from Rairangpur Sub-Treasury. The sum was counted by the Treasurer on 5-1-1957, and then kept inside the strong room of the treasury under double lock as a valuable article. The petitioner as Treasury Officer however did not supervise the counting of the cash inside the box, nor did he take steps to transfer the money to the currency chest inside the strong room on that day.For the next few days, the officials of the Treasury were very busy counting other cash in the currency chest for the purpose of transfer to the State Bank of India. The petitioner therefore found time to verify t...
Pyari Mohan Das Vs. Durga Sankar Das and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-03-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori125
P.V.B. Rao, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 against the order of the Election Tribunal (Additional District Judge. Balasore) dismissing the petition of the appellant praying for setting aside the election to the Orissa Legislative Assembly of respondent No. 1 Sri Durga Sankar Das.2. Respondent No. 1 belongs to Taladi. He was elected to the Orissa Legislative Assembly from the Bhograi Constituency in the election held in 1957. The appellant-petitioner and respondent No. 2 were the two defeated candidates in that election.3. The appellant filed a petition under Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act 1951 alleging that respondent No. 1 (hereinafter railed the respondent) had been working as the Assistant Public Relations Officer under the State of Orissa and though the latter alleged to have submitted his resignation the same had not been accepted by the authorities and as such he is a person holding an office of profit ...
Akshya Narayan Praharaj Vs. Maheswar Bag
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-03-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori207
B.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is an appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act 1951 against the judgment of the Election Tribunal, Balasore, declaring the election of the appellant to the Orissa State Legislative Assembly from Basta Constituency of Balasore, to be void.2. The appellant, the respondent and one Prankrushna Das were rival candidates for a seat in the Orissa State Legislative Assembly from Basta Constituency, during the last general election held in March 1957, and the appellant was duly declared elected. The respondent filed an election petition challenging the validity of the appellant's election' on the following grounds:(i) The appellant had an 'interest in a contract for the execution of work undertaken by Government' and was therefore disqualified under Section 7(d) of the Representation of the People Act 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act); (ii) The appellant was guilty of bribery, under Sub-section (1) of Section 123 of the Act because h...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›