Orissa Court March 1969 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.
Registrar of Companies Vs. Haribansha Misra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-28-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Ori234; 35(1969)CLT577
S. Acharya, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 262C of1965, acquitting the accused persons who in the trial court were convicted and sentenced to payment of fine under Section 220(3) of the Companies Act, 1956, 2. The accused persons were prosecuted on the undisputed fact that they did not file three copies of the balance sheet and the other papers for the financial year ending 31-3-1963 till 12-11-1963 before the Registrar of Companies, as required under Section 220(1) of the Companies Act, 1956. 3. The defence took the plea that as the required balance sheet could not be prepared for reasons beyond their control, it could not be laid before the Annual General Meeting of the Company, and as such the question of filing the copies of the balance sheet before the Registrar of Companies according to Section 220 of the said Act would not arise. 4. The sole reasoning of the appellate court which occasioned the judgment of acq...
Munilal Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-27-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Ori283
Barman, C.J. 1. In this petition the petitioner -- Muni Lal, a Subedar of the Orissa Military Police, (since retired) --prays for a writ of Mandamus to compel the State of Orissa to recognise his right to pension and to payment to him of pension according to the prevailing rules, on the grounds stated in the petition.2. The petitioner then aged 16 years joined the Army in 1927. In due course he was promoted to the rank of Jamadar in 1937. He joined the Eastern States Joint Armed Police Force in 1939 and retired from the Army as a Jamadar. On October 10, 1939 he was appointed as Jamadar, Eastern States Joint Armed Police Force on contract service. He was promoted to the rank of Subedar, in the said Force on April, 1, 1940.3. In pursuance of the Memo dated July 17, 1945 from the Secretary to the Crown Representative to the Resident for the Eastern States, the Eastern States Joint Armed Police Force Contributory Provident Fund Rules came into force with effect from August 1, 1945. Thereaf...
Ananda Prasad Ray Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-25-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Ori263
ORDERG.K. Misra, J. 1. Late Krishnakanta Ray, father of the defendant (petitioner), stood as a candidate from the Kendra-para Parliamentary Constituency in the general election of the year 1957. He took a set of electoral rolls and voter's list for that constituency from the Cut-tack District Election Officer and granted the receipt Ext 1 on 7-2-57 to the following effect. 'Received a complete set of electoral rolls of Kendrapara Parliamentary Constituency with condition that the price of the roll will be paid if the rules do not permit of free supply.' Krishnakanta died in 1959. The defendant was called upon to pay a sum of Rs. 263-10-0 towards the price of the electoral rolls. The defendant did not pay. The State of Orissa 'accordingly filed the suit for recovery of the price of the electoral Tolls. The defendant contested the suit on various grounds the most important of which were that the suit was barred by limitation, that the State of Orissa was not competent to recover the mone...
V. Badreenarayanamoorti Raju Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Bihar and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-24-1969
Reported in: 35(1969)CLT1103; [1969]74ITR405(Orissa)
G. K. MISRA C.J. - Four questions have been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.They are :'(1) Whether the provisions of the Wealth-tax Act levying tax on the total wealth of Hindu undivided families are ultra vices the Constitution of India (2) Whether such provisions are ultra vires the Constitution of India as being discriminatory ?(3) Whether the provisions of the Wealth-tax Act imposing a tax on the capital value of the lands and buildings are ultra vires the Constitution ?(4) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the life insurance premia of Rs. 8,481 and interest thereon of Rs. 85 paid by cheque on the assessees overdraft account with the State bank of India was allowable as a debt under section 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act ?' Mr. P. V. B. Rao for the petitioner does not press the first three questions. It is, therefore, not necessary to give answers on these questions.The facts relevant to the fourt...
Orissa Road Transport Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar a ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-22-1969
Reported in: 35(1969)CLT1097; [1970]75ITR126(Orissa)
G. K. MISRA C.J. - The following question of law has been referred to the High Court for its opinion, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the compensation paid to ex-operators for taking over their bus routes was expenditure of capital nature ?'The facts, on the basis of which the reference has been made, have been very clearly put in paragraph 2 of the order of reference. The relevant assessment years are 1953-54, 1954-55 and 1955-56.The assessee is a road transport company. 98 per cent. of the companys shares are held by the State of Orissa and the Central Government. Stage carriage permits are usually issued for a period of three years. Under the Orissa Motor Vehicles (Regulation of Stage Carriages and Public Carriers Services) Act, 1947 (Orissa Act 36 of 1947), permits can be acquired for unexpired periods on payment of compensation. Some of the routes Worked by private concer...
Aintha SwaIn Vs. Nilakantha Biswal
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-21-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Ori267; 35(1969)CLT799
ORDERG.K. Misra, J. 1. The plaintiff's suit was for recovery of money on the strength of a promissory note Ext. 1 executed by the defendant on 28-1-62. The defendant admitted the execution of the promissory note. He however contended that no consideration passed thereunder and that it was given by way of a security on behalf of his brother-in-law who was alleged to have committed theft and was called upon to execute a promissory note. The case underwent trial. The plaintiff's suit was dismissed by the trial court. The plaintiff accordingly filed an appeal. Arguments in the appeal were heard by the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar and he reserved the judgment to 25-9-67. On that day the defendant filed an application for amendment of the written statement alleging that in paragraph 11 of the written statement the year '1963' was a mistake for '1962' and that as it escaped the notice of the defendant by inadvertence, it should be allowed to be corrected. The learned Subordinate Jud...
Narasinghmal Premchand Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar and Oriss ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-21-1969
Reported in: [1970]75ITR405(Orissa)
R. N. MISRA J. - This is a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. At the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of the court :'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that no genuine firm came into existence under the deed dated November 12, 1958, and confirming the rejected of registration under section 26A by the authorities below ?'The facts appearing in the statement drawn up by the Tribunal, so far as relevant for decision of the point, are as hereunder. Narasinghmal, Premchand and Pokhraj constituted a partnership in the name and style of 'Narasinghmal Premchand' under a partnership deed dated January 25, 1948. In the said firm, Narasinghmal, Premchand and Pokhraj had 6 annas 3 pies, 5 annas 3 pies and 4 annas 6 pies shares, respectively, and the said firm had been granted registration under section 26A of the Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessm...
Bhalu Naik Vs. Hemo Naikani
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-18-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Ori236; 35(1969)CLT532
S.K. Ray, J. 1. This is an appeal preferred by the husband against an order of pendente lite maintenance passed by the Court in a proceeding for restitution of conjugal rights initiated by the wife. The said proceeding for restitution of conjugal rights has been numbered as O. S. No. 1 of 1967 in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Berhampur. The husband likewise has started a proceeding under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in the said court which has been numbered as O. S. No. 16 of 1967. There is nothing on record to indicate whether the divorce proceeding or the restitution proceeding is earlier in point of time, but that is not material for the purposes of this case. 2. The wife-respondent filed an application under section 24 for interim maintenance and expenses on 15-2-67. The husband-appellant has filed a counter in which he questions the maintainability of the petition on the ground that the Rule 13 of the Rules framed by the High Court of Orissa under section 21 o...
Arjuno Goudo and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-17-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Ori200; 1969CriLJ999
ORDERS. Acharya, J. 1. The petitioners stand convicted under Section 427, I. P. C. and have been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- each in default to undergo R. I. for 3 months. 2. The facts found to have been proved in the case are that the complainant having encroached upon a piece of Government land, was in cultivating possession of the same for a few vears, and in the year in question had grown Biri and paddy crops thereon, which the petitioners damaged by driving and allowing their cattle to graze on the same. In the trial the petitioners simply denied the entire occurrence. 3. The main Question raised by Mr. Murty, the learned counsel for the petitioners, is that on the facts proved no 'Wrongful loss' as defined in Section 23, I. P. C. was caused to the complainant as he was in unauthorised occupation of the disputed land, and as such the petitioners' act would not amount to an offence of 'Mischief' as defined in Section 425, I. P. C. In support of his above contention Mr. Mur...
Bedabar Sahu Vs. Khetramani Barik
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-12-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Ori194; 35(1969)CLT858
ORDERG.K. Misra, J. 1. The plaintiff brought a money suit for realisation of Rs. 286.76 paise from the defendant (petitioner) on the allegation that the defendant was doing contract business and the plaintiff advanced him a sum of Rs. 2,000/- by instalments on condition that the defendant would pay half the profit of the business together with the amount advanced in case of profit, but in case of loss the defendant would refund the amount advanced. The plaintiff's case was that ultimately this agreement failed and there was an accounting. On 7-8-64 there was an agreement that the defendant would pay a sum of Rs. 375/- and that be would pay a further sum of 2/3rd out of the security deposit with the Government after deduction of costs. The defendant did not pay up any amount in accordance with the agreement. The defendant admitted the original agreement and advance of money by the plaintiff. He also accepted the position that after accounts were taken an agreement was executed on 7-8-64...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »