Orissa Court July 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.
Bala Bariha and ors. Vs. Kathu Bariha
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ori47
ORDERA. Misra, J.1. Each of the petitioners has been convicted Under Section 447 I. P. C. and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 20/-; in default, to undergo S. I. for one week.2. The complainant's case, in brief, is that as ex-jhankar of village Srigida, he was all along in possession of the jhankar service lands situate in the village. For some time, he engaged petitioner No. 1 to work as gomasta-jhankar under him on payment of five pudugs of paddy per year as his wages. Subsequently, when petitioner No. 1 stopped working as gomasta, he stopped payment of his remuneration. On the date of occurrence, it is alleged that petitioner No. 1 along with his relations the other petitioners, trespassed into the disputed land which is a part of the jhankar lands in possession of the complainant, ploughed it and spread manure. Thereby they committed criminal trespass. The defence is that complainant had given the disputed land to petitioner No. 1, while he was working as gomasta-jhankar and he has been ...
T.C. Panigrahi Vs. Goru Satyarajulu and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ori25; 35(1969)CLT1010
Patra, J. 1. This is an appeal against an appellate order of the learned single Judge of this Court allowing in part an appeal preferred against a judgment of the District Judge, Koraput. One Goru Neelakantham applied on 11-5-1957 to adjudge him insolvent and this application was allowed by the District Judge on 12-12-1959. Long before such adjudication, he had executed a deed of gift (Ex. 1) dated 16-11-1948 in favour of his wife, the present appellant in respect of eight items of property including a house situated in Kapur street, Jeypore town, which is item n6. 8 of the schedule of the gift deed. On 26-5-1955, he also executed a sale deed (Ext, 2) in favour of his mother Goru Appayamma in respect of a house site situated in Jeypore town. After adjudication, a receiver was appointed and he filed an application under Section 4 of the Provincial Insolvency Act on 30-1-1961 averring that Exts. 1 and 2 are fictitious documents which were never acted upon and were created with a view to ...
Jagannath Misra and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Ori296; 35(1969)CLT1044; 1969CriLJ1521
Patra, J. 1. These eight applications-(Crl. Misc. 62/69 and 95/69 being by the same person) have been filed praying that this Court should issue directions in the nature of habeas corpus under Section 491 Cr. P. C, to produce the petitioners before this Court and set them at liberty. 2. All the petitioners excepting the one in Cr. Misc 77 of 69 were arrested by the police of Gunupur Police Station of Gunupur Sub-division in Koraput district on charges under Sections 120B/399 -I. P. C. on different dates between 30-1-1969 and 2-2-1969, and were duly produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate at Gunupur, who remanded them to custody till 14-2-69, A proceeding under Section 109 Cr. P. C. having been initiated against the petitioner in Crl. Misc. 77/69, he was arrested by the Gunupur Police on 2-3-69 and was duly produced before the Magistrate at Gunupur, who remanded him to custody pending furtherinvestigation. It appears from the record that besides these petitioners a large number of...
Ramprasad Tormal Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1969
Reported in: [1970]25STC38(Orissa)
B.K. Patra, J.1. These are eight references made by the Member, Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the application of the assessee who is a wholesale textile dealer dealing in mill-made cloth. While submitting his taxable turnover fcfr the purchases covered by these references, he claimed certain sums as permissible deductions under Section 5(2)(A)(a)(ii) of the Act being sales to registered dealers of goods intended for resale in Orissa. The Sales Tax Officer suspected the genuineness of the declarations furnished by the assessee and called upon him to produce the purchasing dealers from whom he is said to have obtained declarations in support of such claim. But the assessee pleaded his inability to produce them. The assessing officer therefore held that the declarations furnished by the assessee are not true and correct as required under Rule 27(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947, and refused t...
Beni Bhuj Sahu Vs. Chief Engineer, Hirakud Dam Project and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-11-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ori9; 35(1969)CLT898
G.K. Misra, C.J. 1. The petitioner was appointed as a Telephone operator under the Government of Orissa in the Hirakud Dam Project on 1-4-60. A notice was issued on 30-4-63 intimating the petitioner that his services would be terminated after one month from the date of service of the notice. The notice was styled as 'Retrenchment Notice'. Against the order retrenching him. the petitioner filed an appeal before the concerned Chief Engineer. As he got no response, he filed the writ application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution on 21-6-65. 2. The only point raised by Mr. Rath is that the Hirakud Dam Project is an industry and that the petitioner is a workman and as such he was entitled to the benefits of Section 25F(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The section not having been complied with, the order of retrenchment is void and without jurisdiction. 3. Mr. Das, the learned Standing Counsel rightly does not dispute that the Hirakud Dam Project is an industry and that t...
Brahmananda Satapathi Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-11-1969
Reported in: (1970)ILLJ564Ori
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. The petitioner was a permanent Government servant holding the post of Personal Aesietant to the Director of Industries. He attained the age of 55 on 15 July 1964. On 31 May 1965, a notice was served on the petitioner that he would retire from service on 30 August 1965. The petitioner challenges the order as being void and without Jurisdiction inasmuch as his case had been reviewed by the Government before he attained the age of 65 and he was not compulsorily retired.2. The main point urged by Sri Misra is that after the petitioner attained the age of 55, he cannot be made to retire with three months notice as each a compulsory retirement amounts to penalty. Reliance is place on Rule 13, of (vii), Explanation (g) of the Orissa Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Ruler, 1662. The rule rune thus:13. Nature of penalties.-The following penalties may. for good and sufficient reasons and as hereinafter provided, be imposed on a Government servent, namely: * ...
The Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. the State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-10-1969
Reported in: 35(1969)CLT1027; [1970]25STC171(Orissa)
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. The petitioner is a company under the Indian Companies Act and carries on business at Gorumahisani in the district of Maynrbhanj in Orissa. It is a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act). The assessment relates to sales of ferro-manganese ore by the petitioner for the quarter ending 30th September, 1958, to the quarter ending 31st March, 1959, to various parties outside the State of Orissa in the course of inter-State trade and commerce. The petitioner sold all such goods to registered dealers and such goods were specified in the certificates of registration of such registered dealers as being required for the purpose of resale or use in the course of manufacture of goods. The petitioner claims to have filed declarations in 'C Form before the assessing authorities, before the assessment was made, in support of its claim to be taxed at a concessional rate under the Central Act. The concessional rate as prev...
Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. the State of Orissa : No. 2
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-10-1969
Reported in: [1970]25STC177(Orissa)
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. The petitioner is a company under the Companies Act, 1956, and carries on business at Gormahisani in the district of Mayurbhanj. It is a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act. The assessments were in respect of four quarters ending with 30th June, 1958, 30th September, 1958, 30th December, 1958, and 31st March, 1959. The assessments relate to sales of ferro manganese ores by the petitioner to various parties outside the State of Orissa in the course of inter-State trade and commerce. They were sold to registered dealers and such goods were specified in the certificate of registration of such registered dealers as being required by them for the purpose of resale or use in the course of manufacture. In law, the petitioner is to pay Central sales tax during the relevant period at the concessional rate of one per cent, if the declarations in 'C' Form were attached to the returns in support of the claim.; otherwise, tax was payable at the full rate of five per...
Sri Purna Chandra Das Vs. Chairman, State Transport Authority and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-09-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ori1; 35(1969)CLT931
G.K. Misra, C.J. 1. The petitioner was a peon attached to the office of the State Transport Authority and was a permanent Class IV servant. On 12th May 1964 he was charged with tampering and misdelivery of two envelopes meant for registration and of handing over the same to a person not the addressee and misappropriation of service postage stamp. He was suspended on that very day. One Sri B. B. Roy, was appointed the Enquiring Officer. In his Enquiry Report he exonerated the petitioner. Mr. Ram-nathan, Chairman of the State Transport Authority, the ultimate punishing authority, did not agree with the Enquiry Report and passed the final order of dismissal. Against this order the writ application has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The aforesaid facts are not challenged by the State in its counter-affidavit. 2. In the petition Mr. Pal covered a large many grounds. In the course of argument he confined himself to the main contentions enumerated in paragraph 10 o...
Brundaban Padhi Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-08-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ori81; 35(1969)CLT926
G.K. Misba, C.J.1. The petitioner was an Aniin in the Hirakud Land Organisation. Certain charges were framed against him alleging misconduct. After the enquiry was over. Government in the Political and Services Department communicated their tentative decision to discharge the petitioner from service and he was asked to show cause. The petitioner showed cause. Ultimately, however, the petitioner was dismissed by the order of the Collector dated 20-3-65, and a direction was also issued to realise Rs. 343-85 from him representing half the misappropriated amount.The writ application has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution saying that the order so passed was without jurisdiction and must be set aside.2. Law is well settled that if the punishment tentatively proposed against a civil servant is of a lesser kind, but after hearing his representation he is awarded a graver form of punishment, there is non-compliance with the provisions of Article 311(2) of the Constitution...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »