Orissa Court July 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.
Somanath Pradhan and ors. Vs. Sanno Govindo Misra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-31-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori122
G.C. Das, J.1. This appeal by some of the defendants against the concurrent decision of the court below raises inter alia rather an interesting question of law whether a second suit for redemption would lie. The plaintiff's suit for redemption was decreed by the Courts below and their decree directed the defendants to deliver possession of the suit lands to the plaintiff within three months from the date of the decree. The plaintiff was an assignee from defendant 3, a legal representative of the original mortgagor. Defendants 1 and 2 were the mortgagee and defendants 4 to 14 purchased different parcels of the mortgagee's interest from defendants 1 and 2.2. The plaintiff commenced a suit for redemption, simpliciter, to redeem a registered usufructuary mortgage, dated 25-9-1909 executed by Dandapani Mirsa, the late grandfather of defendant 3 in favour of the father of defendants 1 and 2, for a sum of Rs. 30/-. Both the original mortgagor and the mortgagee are now dead. After the death of...
Raja Bahadur Kishore Chandra Deo Bhanj Vs. Raghunath Misra and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-30-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Ori1
G.C. Das, J.1. This is an application under Articles 132 and 133 of the Constitution for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against an order of this Court in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 194 of 1957 declaring the election of the petitioner to the Orissa Legislative Assembly void. At the outset Mr. Pal, counsel for the petitioner, conceded that Article 132 of the Constitution would not apply to this application, since it does not involve any question of interpretation of the Constitution. His sole contention was that he is entitled to leave under Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution, this being a fit case for appeal to the Supreme Court. Mr. H. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, urged that an application under Article 133 is not maintainable in the present context.His whole argument was that Article 329(b) lays down a bar to interference by courts in electoral matters. Article 329 begins with the words: 'Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution.......' and Cl. ...
Paduram Sahu and ors. Vs. Biswambar Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori259; 24(1958)CLT417; 1958CriLJ1426
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J. 1. This is a revision petition against the appellate judgment of the Sessions Judge of Bhawanipatna, maintaining the conviction of the petitioners under Section 500 I P. C. and the sentence of fine of RS. 60/- passed on each of them by a First Class Magistrate of Nawapara. 2. The six petitioners are all Thelis living in village' Jinjera, P. S. Jank, in Nawapara Sub-division of Kalahandi District. In Baisakh of 1954 the marriage of the niece of one Udiram Sahu (P. W. 2) of Dumirpani village, in P. S. Jank, with the son of one Sakhi Chand Sahu (P. W. 3) of Jinjera took place. . The said Sakhi Chand is the Sammandhi of the complainant Biswambar Sahu. Along with the 'Baraf party of Sakhi Chand the complainant Biswambar Sahu and other relations of his went to Dumirpani, to the house of Udiram Sahu for the purpose of the marriage. It was learnt that a letter (marked X) had been sent to Udiram Sahu by the petitioner in which it was alleged that the complainant Biswa...
Bramhachari Martha Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-15-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori207; 1959CriLJ1460
R.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a petition in revision against the conviction of the petitioner under Section 379 I. P. C. and the sentence of fine of Rs. 200/- passed by a First Class Magistrate of Khandpara, which were upheld on appeal by the Sessions Judge of Puri.2. The petitioner who is a resident of village Koithapalli was charged with dishonest removal, from the possession of Government of 19 mango trees by cutting and removing the same from Anabadi plot No. 444 of the said village. Several other co-villagers were said to have assisted him in cutting and removing the 'trees, but they were acquitted by the learned Magistrate; but the petitioner was convicted and sentenced as he was said to be the ringleader.3. The plea taken by the petitioner was that the trees were in the possession of the village Thakurani and for the purpose of that village deity the villagers, including himself, cut the trees and sold them to other parties.4. In a dispute of this type the criminal court has t...
Jami Narasaya Prusty and Bros. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-08-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori79; 24(1958)CLT377; [1958]9STC648(Orissa)
P.V.B. Rao, J. 1. The petitioners Messrs. Jami Narasaya Prusty and Brothers through the Managing Partner Jami Narasaya Prusty filed this application for issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus on the opposite party not to collect the tax assessed on the turn-over of Rs. 45000/- during the three quarters as sales tax.2. The petitioners are a partnership firm consisting of Jami Narasaya Prusty, Jami Sundarbalu Prusty and Jami Srivangan Prusty and are dealers registered as such under the Orissa Sales Tax Act. The petitioners submitted a return of their sales for the quarters ending 30-6-55, 30-9-55 and 31-12-55 for a gross turn-over of Rs. 36,332-6-3, Rs. 41,807 0-6 and Rs. 33,883-12-6 respectively The petitioner are dealers in grocery, stationery, toilets, books, Khadi cloths, oils, oil-seeds, iron goods, agricultural implements etc. and maintained their accounts on the gross sales that took place in their shop.The Sales Tax Officer was not satisfied with the gross return made by the p...
Basudeb Hota and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-08-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori283; 24(1958)CLT366; [1958]9STC663(Orissa)
P.V.B. Rao, J. 1. These three applications under Article 226 of the Constitution are directed against the orders of theCollector of Sales Tax assessing the petitioners to each of the applications to sales tax on the ground that their turn-over escaped assessment and had been under-assessed. As these three applications involve a common question of law, they are heard together and are disposed of by this judgment.2. The common question argued before us with regard to these three applications is whether the said re-assessment can be made after 36 months of the original assessment. In O. J. C. No. 289-of 1956, the petitioner is a dealer in cocoanuts at Salchigopal in Puri district and is a registered dealer under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, his registration number being 279. For the quarters ending 31-12-50 to 30-9-51, 31-3-52 to 30-9-52 and 31-3-53 the assessing officer assessed the dealer and disallowed the deductions claimed by him under Section 5 (2) (a) (ii) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act....
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›