Orissa Court July 1960 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.
Kanduri Charan SwaIn and ors. Vs. Birabhadra SwaIn and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-28-1960
Reported in: 26(1960)CLT519; 1961CriLJ520
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a revision petition against the final order passed on 12-1-60 under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code by a First Class Magistrate, Cuttack declaring the members of the first party (opposite party) to be in possession of the disputed property which consists of A2-33 decimals in village Nachipara.2. Both parties claimed to be in actual possession of the disputed land as bhag tenants. There was a proceeding under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code initiated by the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Sadar on 3-12-57 in respect of the disputed properties between the said parties. The Sub-divisional Magistrate restrained both parties from entering upon the property by his order dated 13-12-57. Subsequently on 23-12-57 after hearing both the parties he made the order under Section 144 absolute against the first party but vacated the order against the second party petitioners. The second party were thus able to get possession of the lands and they ...
Pratap Kesari Deo Vs. the State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-27-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Ori131
Narasimham, C.J.1. This, is an application under Article 226 of the Gbnstitution of India against the appellate Order of the Board of Revenue, Orissa, confirming with some modifications the assessment of rent on the Nazul lands and the Palace Compound of the petitioner made by the Additional District Magistrate of Kalahandi.2. The petitioner was the former Ruler of Kalahandi State which was one of the Feudatory States which merged with the Province of Orissa by the well known Merger agreement on the 1st January, 1948. In accordance with that merger agreement entered into between the petitioner as the Ruler of the State on the one hand and the Government of India, on the other some of the properties within the State were recognised as his private properties. It is admitted that the disputed plots consisting of 2.33 acres in village Kasinga form part of the Nazul lands which were recognised as the private property of the petitioner.It is further admitted that 36.2 acres of land in Mouza ...
Collector of Puri Vs. Hrushikesh Mitra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-27-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Ori135; 26(1960)CLT529
Narasimham, C.J. 1. This is an appeal by the Collector of Puri against the judgment of the District Judge, Ganjam-Nayagarh, directing payment of compensation to the respondent at a certain rate, in respect of 1.44 acres of land in Puri town which was acquired by the Collector for the construction of the Fire Station at Puri.2. The said piece of land was originally requisitioned under Rule 75-A of the Defence of India Rules and possession was actually taken on the 6th January 1945. Section 19 of the Defence of India Act contains detailed provisions for payment of compensation when property is requisitioned under the Defence of India Rules. But for some reason or other (which is not clear from, the record), neither the Collector nor the previous owners (respondents) cared to get the compensation fixed for the requisitioned property, under the aforesaid Section of the Defence of India Act.But the property admittedly remained in the possession of the Collector of Puri and it was eventually...
Bocha Krishna Rao Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-22-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Ori36; 26(1960)CLT590; 1961CriLJ298
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a revision petition against the appellate judgment of the Sessions Judge of Jeypore maintaining the conviction of the petitioners under Section 379 I. P. C. and the sentence of three months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 50/- passed by the First Class Magistrate of Rayaghada.2. The charge against the petitioner was that he committed theft of one gold 'Kasu' on 19-10-58 by snatching it away from the neck of the daughter of P. W. 1. a goldsmith of Rayagada town. The guilty removal was said to have been witnessed by two children Pws. 2 and 3 aged 10 and 8 years respectively. Though charge sheet was submitted on 1-11-58 for some reason or other the trial did not commence till 4-3-59. On that day 4 prosecution witnesses including the two important eye witnesses namely Pws. 2 and 3 were examined in chief.The defence lawyer asked for time to cross examine them as he was not feeling well that day, but the learned Magistrate refused to give him time s...
Mohammad Umar Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-22-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Ori150; 26(1960)CLT610; 1961CriLJ353
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J. 1. This is a petition in revision against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Koraput-Jeypore maintaining the conviction of the petitioner and the sentence of one month's simple imprisonment passed on him under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act (Act 31 of 1946). The petitioner is a minor aged 14-15 years. His mother is the daughter of one Habib Isa (S. W. 1) who is a resident of Kotpad in Koraput district. The petitioner's father is one Anwar Ali who though formerly a resident of Kotpad migrated to Pakisthan some time in 1949 and consequently lost his Indian citizenship under Article 7 of the Constitution.2. The petitioner also went to Pakisthan but returned to India with a Pakisthani pass-port (Ext. 7) in which he was described as a citizen of Pakisthan. In the C visa affixed to the pass-port issued to him, by the Indian High Commissioner in Karachi, it was noted that it was valid for three months from 22-2-56. The petitioner then came to his maternal grand-f...
Brijlal Malhotra Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Ori64; 26(1960)CLT647; 1961CriLJ539
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Ganjam recommending the quashing of a proceeding under Section 9(a) of the Opium Act (Act 1 of 1878) pending against the petitioner in the Court of a First Class Magistrate at Berhampur.2. On 29-4-59 the Excise S. I. of Berhampur submitted a report under Section 20G of the Opium Act to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Berhampur stating therein that the petitioner had committed an offence under Section 9(c) of the Act. The petitioner was described as a resident of Cawnpur, but it was mentioned that he was arrested at Berhampur on the 11th April, 1959. It was further stated that some bags containing opium capsules were sent by railway from Cawnpur to Berhampur by the petitioner addressed to himself; and that these were seized by the Excise Staff. Having stated these facts the report of the Excise Sub-Inspector further added that in the opinion of that officer the petitioner was guilty of 'illegal export of opium caps...
Krushna Mohan Mohanty Vs. Govinda Chandra Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Ori171
ORDERJ.K. Misra, J.1. This petition in revision is against the appellate Order o the learned Subordinate Judge, Puri, setting aside the order of the executing court and dismissing the petitioner's petition under Order 21, Rule 90, C. P. C. The petitioner is the judgment-debtor and the opposite party is the decree-holder-auction-purchaser. A two storeyed building of the petitioner in the town of Puri had been attached in the execution proceeding and one of the dates for sale had been fixed against 20-6-56.On that day certain part payment was made by the petitioner, and the petitioner prayed for time, waiving issue of fresh sale proclamation. The learned Munsif fixed 20-7-56 for payment of the balance and ordered that in default of such payment the said sale would take place at 12 noon of that date. On 20-7-56, the petitioner filed a petition for time and again waived issue of fresh sale proclamation, and the court allowed time till 20-8-56 for full payment of the balance. There was no e...
Fazl Bhai Dhala and Co. Vs. Collector of Sales Tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-18-1960
Reported in: [1961]12STC216(Orissa)
R.L. Narasimham, C.J. 1. In these three references, under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, the Member, Board of Revenue, Orissa, has referred the following questions for the decision of this Court:-(1) Whether the transactions commencing with collection of raw hides at Jharsuguda, sending hides to Madras to be tanned and exported, and the tanning of hides there and exporting the same to foreign exporters, is a continuation of the series of acts in the course of the export of goods out of the territory of India or not?(2) Whether the exemption claimed under Article 286(1)(b) of the Constitution is rightly based on deductions claimed in the returns themselves as 'turnover' on goods sold to foreign exporters, or is an afterthought ?(3) Whether the proviso to Article 286(2) governs also the provisions of Article 286(1) (a) and (b) of the Constitution ?(4) Whether in the alternative the deductions claimed in the returns may be exempted from taxation under Article 286(2) of t...
Member, Sales Tax Tribunal Vs. S. Lal and Co.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-13-1960
Reported in: [1961]12STC25(Orissa)
R.L. Narasimham, C.J. 1. The following question of law has been referred to this Court, by the Member, Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act.'Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case the proviso to Section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act will not operate unless the purchasing dealer gives a declaration as contemplated under Rule 27(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947.2. The facts which are unchallanged are these. Messrs Tullock & Co., of Barbil are a firm of registered dealers selling chromium ore in Orissa. Messrs S. Lal & Co., are also another firm of registered dealers in Orissa holding registration certificate No. 1335-BA. In their certificate it was specified that 'minerals' were one of the goods which the said firm was entitled to buy in Orissa, free of sales tax, 'for the purpose of resale in Orissa (see Form III). It is admitted that in the certificate no maximum limit was mentioned for the purchase of minerals by this...
Netrananda Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-13-1960
Reported in: [1961]12STC169(Orissa)
R.L. Narasimham, C.J. 1. The following questions of law have been referred to this Court for opinion, by the Member, Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act.(a) Whether a registered dealer who has admittedly sold jute to another registered dealer in Orissa is liable to pay sales tax, simply because the former has not obtained a declaration in writing, even though the purchase and resale is admitted by the purchasing dealer.(b) Whether Rule 27(2) made under the Orissa Sales Tax Act is ultra vires of the rule-making authority conferred under Section 29 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act.(c) Whether in the circumstances of this case the Sales Tax Department having sent a letter, in No. 7(b) of 2nd January, 1950, directing non-realisation of sales tax from Sinclair Murray & Co. from 12th December, 1949, the petitioner is liable to pay tax.(d) Whether in view of the provisions of law as laid down in Section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act as it stood at ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »