Orissa Court September 1971 Judgments
Md. Jaffer Haji Ebrahim Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-24-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori101
A. Misra, J. 1. Plaintiff is the appellant. Defendant No. 1 is the Union of India representing four different Railways, the South Eastern Railway, the Eastern Railway, the Northern Railway and the North Eastern Railway who have been described as defendant Nos. 1/a. to 1/d. Defendant No. 2 is the proprietor of the Tara Oil and Ginning Mills of Hapur in U. P.2. The facts on which the plaintiff has founded his claim, in brief, are as follows:A tank load of mustard oil containing 528 maunds was consigned by defendant No. 2 at Hapur junction in Northern Railway on 19-9-1960 under R/R No. 217968 invoice No. 15 for delivery to self at the destination Cuttack on the South Eastern Railway. The railway receipt along with the bill amounting to Rs. 39,323.32 was sent through the Punjab National Bank, Hapur to the plaintiff to enable him to take delivery of the consignment. When the consignment reached Cuttack on 22-10-1960, the tank was found to be leaking. The plaintiff took delivery of the goods...
Tag this Judgment!Trilochan and anr. Vs. Bamadev Pradhan and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-24-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori136; 37(1971)CLT1114
B.K. Patra, J.1. Defendants Nos. 8 and 9 in the, suit are the appellants against a reversing judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Dhenkanal. The suit was filed for a declaration of the plaintiffs title to plot No. 192 measuring 1.97 acres comprised in holding No. 68 in mouza Baligerang, and for recovery of possession of the same after a further declaration that the registered sale deed Ex. A dated 13-1-64 executed in respect of the land by defendants Nos. 1 to 4 in favour of defendants Nos. 8 and 9 are null and void. There was also a claim for recovery of mesne profits amounting to Rs. 50/-.2. The disputed land admittedly belonged to defendant No. 1 and Kesab, father of defendants Nos. 2 to 7 who acquired the same on Nayabadi basis in the year 1933. The case of the plaintiff Rama-dev Pradhan who is respondent No. 1 in this appeal is that in the year 1947 defendant No. 1 borrowed a sum of Rs. 26/-from him and gave the land on usufrauc-tury mortgage to him and that in the year 1951 defenda...
Tag this Judgment!Dolagobinda Sahu Vs. Nityananda Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-23-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori177; 37(1971)CLT1104
R.N. Misra, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order passed under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. by the learned Subordinate Judge of Puri refusing to set aside an ex parte final decree.2. On 29-10-68, the Commissioner submitted his report. The case was posted to 21-11-68 for objections. The appellant who was the defendant in the court below did not file his objection that day and the learned Trial Judge accepted the Commissioner's report and directed the final decree to be prepared. When an application for reopening the matter was made by setting aside the order dated 21-11-68 on the ground that the appellant was ill at the material point of time the learned Trial Judge accepted the allegation of his illness, but refused to reopen the matter on the basis that to a final decree proceeding Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. had no application. For his conclusion he relied upon a decision in AIR 1949 Pat 68 (Surendra Kumar Singh v. Mukund Lal Sahu) and another reported in AIR 1961 Cal 534 (Suresh Ch...
Tag this Judgment!G. Azeez Basha and Co. Vs. Sales Tax Officer
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-20-1971
Reported in: 37(1971)CLT1185; [1972]29STC352(Orissa)
G.K. Misra, C.J. 1. The petitioner carries on the business of selling bidis prepared by hand and not with the aid of machines operated with or without the aid of power. He is a registered dealer under the Orissa Sales Tax Act (Orissa Act 14 of 1947), hereinafter to be referred to as the Act. Bidis are prepared with tobacco wrapped up with dried kendu leaves. The petitioner was assessed to sales tax on 29th January, 1968, by assessment order (annexure I) for the quarters ending 30th June, 1967, and 30th September, 1967. Petitioner's case is that bidis are not exigible to sales tax and, as such, the assessment is contrary to law. Petitioner prays for issuing a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned assessment order and for issuing a writ of mandamus restraining the opposite party from realising the tax assessed. The learned standing counsel contends that hand-made bidis are liable to sales tax.2. Relevant law and the notifications thereunder may be noticed.3. Notification No. 33925 C.T...
Tag this Judgment!Shanti Devi Agarwalla Vs. Kusum Kumari Sarkar and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-16-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori178
R.N. Misra, J.1. In a pending probate proceeding (O. S. No. 25 of 1966) before the learned District Judge of Cuttack an application was made by the petitioner purporting to be under Order 1, Rule 10, C.P.C. read with Section 268 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 to be added as a party and enter caveat. The learned District Judge has refused leave to the petitioner- Hence this revision.2. The historical background of the case may now be furnished in order to appreciate the point required to be decided. One Adhar Chandra Sarkar owned properties located in the town of Cuttack and at Sundargarh. He died on 5-6-62, Kusum Kumari Dasi, opposite party No. 1, admittedly was the wife of Adhar. Sakun-tala, opposite party No. 2, claims to be the second wife. Her status as wife has, however, not been, admitted by Kusum Kumari.Adhar is said to have left behind two wills -- one executed on 5-4-62 which is registered document and the other is dated 23-5-62 and it is not registered. Sakuntala applied ...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Prusti Vs. State and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori186; 37(1971)CLT1171
R.N. Misra, J.1. The plaintiff is in appeal. The learned Subordinate Judge rejected an application for interim injunction pending disposal of the suit. The suit that is pending is for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants-respondents from proceeding with Certificate Case No. 964-C-II-1962 before the Certificate Officer. Kamakshanagar. The plaintiff was a construction contractor and had undertaken to lay roads and raise buildings under the Sub-Divisional Officer of Kamakshanagar on behalf of the Tribal and Rural Welfare Department of the State Government. There were two registered instruments and one unregistered instrument in respect of 5 of the items of work and in respect of the last item there was no document at all. The contracts were terminated and extension of time was not allowed, but later on the contractor's representation the orders rescinding the contracts were withdrawn. Time was extended till 30-5-61, but as the contractor did not complete the works as Per the co...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›