Orissa Court September 1976 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.
Sushil Kumar Etc. Vs. Binodini Rath and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-13-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ori112
S. Acharya, J. 1. One Gobinda Ch. Rath (32 years old at the time of his death), an Assistant in the Orissa Secretariat, was working on deputation under National Mineral Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'N. M. D. C.') at Kiriburu Iron Ore Project in the district of Keonjhar. He, on taking leave for a few days, was going from Kiriburu towards Barbil on 23-4-1966 in the jeep ERT 6477 belonging to the N. M. D. C., the opposite party No. 1 in the court be lew. On the way said jeep collided with the truck ORJ 378 (belonging to the opposite party No. 2 in the court below) coming from the opposite direction. Due to the said accident Gobinda Chandra Rath was thrown out of the jeep, and he sustained several injuries on his person and died at the Tata Hospital at Jamshedpur on 25-4-1966. His wife Binodini Rath, for herself and on behalf of her minor children filed an application for compensation under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for the loss sustained by her and...
State of Orissa Vs. Pushraj Bijayakumar
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-13-1976
Reported in: [1978]41STC443(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. At the instance of the State, the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, has stated this case and referred the following two questions for opinion of this court:(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the octroi duty paid by a dealer and subsequently realised from the customers, is a part of the sale price as defined under Section 2(h) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act and(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the octroi duty paid by the assessee and subsequently realised by charging them separately in the bills has to be included in estimating the gross turnover and taxable turnover as defined under the Orissa Sales Tax Act?2. The short facts are these: The assessee, a firm, is a registered dealer carrying on business within the town of Cuttack and within the jurisdiction of the Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack-I, East Circle. For the accounting period 1970-71, the assessee did not include in its return of gross turnover and taxabl...
Megharaj Agarwala and ors. Vs. Radheshyam Agarwala
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-09-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ori138; 42(1976)CLT1143
ORDERP.K. Mohanti, J.1. This revisional application is directed against an order refusing leave to amend the plaint.2. Petitioners filed Title Suit No. 124/9 of 1967-73 for declaration of their right of way over plot No. 950 of the fourth settlement situated at Binka and for a mandatory injunction directing the defendants 1 and 2 to remove the unauthorised constructions raised by them over the said plot. They also alleged that people of the locality have a right of way over the said plot and sought for permission to sue on their behalf. Defendants 1 and 2 denied the plaintiffs' right of way and the allegation about the unauthorised construction. In pursuance of the notice issued under Order 1, R. 8, C.P.C. defendants 3 and 4 applied for being added as parties to the suit. They filed written statement supporting the case of defendants 1 and 2. In the prayer portion of the plaint, plaintiffs had mentioned that the reliefs were claimed against the defendants. They made an application for ...
Aranya Kumar Panda Vs. Chintamani Panda and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-07-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ori87; 42(1976)CLT1222
ORDERP.K. Mohanti, J. 1. This revisional application is directed against an order of the trial court refusing to grant permission to the plaintiff to adduce evidence in rebuttal of the evidence produced by the defendants on issue No. 8.2. The plaintiff-petitioner filed Title Suit No. 22 of 1973 in the court of the Subordinate Judge of Kendnapara challenging two sale-deeds dated 15-1-73 executed by his father (defendant No. 1)in favour of defendants 2 and 4 on the ground of want of legal necessity. On the pleadings of the parties as many as ten issues were framed. Issue No. 8 runs aa follows:'Are the alienations made by defendant No. 1 for legal necessity and is the plaintiff bound by the transfer?''3. The burden lies on defendants 2 and 4, who are purchasers under the impugned sale-deeds, to prove either that there were legal necessities in fact or that they made proper and bona fide enquiries as to the existence of such necessities and did all that was reasonable to satisfy themselves...
Mst. Dura Deo and ors. Vs. Smt. Pirobati Dei and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-07-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ori85; 42(1976)CLT1247
ORDERP.K. Mohanti, J. 1. The sole question for consideration in this Civil Revision is whether in a suit for partition of joint family property, the valuation of the suit should be made taking into view the value of the entire property or the share of the property which the plaintiff claims.2. The plaintiff filed Title SuitNo. 7 of 1971 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Sambalpur in forma pauperi for declaration of title to and recovery of possession of the B schedule lands and in the alternative for partition of her share in the A schedule properties. The entire property measuring 25.78 acres described in Schedule A of the plaint was valued at Rs. 12,000/-. The plaintiff's share in the property was valued at Rs. 3,000/-. The B schedule properties measuring 5.98 acres were valued at Rs. 3,000/-. During the trial, the plaintiff gave up the relief for declaration of title and recovery of possession of B schedule lands end filed a memo, to that effect. The trial court passed a prelim...
Cuttack Municipality Vs. Shyamsundar Behera
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-07-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ori137; 42(1976)CLT1283
ORDERP.K. Mohanti, J.1. Both the Civil Revisions have been heard together and will be disposed of by this common judgment as they raise a common question of law and fact.2. The short point for decision in both the cases is whether a suit filed against a sole defendant who had died prior to the institution of the suit is a nullity and whether the plaintiff will be allowed to add the legal representatives of the deceased defendant under the provisions of Order 1, Rule 10, Civil Procedure Code.3. The Cuttack Municipality filed S. C. C. Suit No. 106 of 1974 against one Chintamoni Behera and S. C. C. Suit No. 107 of 1974 against one Kartik Chandra Mitra for recovery of the arrears of municipal taxes. The process-servers who were entrusted with the service of the suit summonses reported that the defendants in both the suits had died long prior to the institution of the suits. Then the plaintiff applied in both the suits for substitution of the legal representatives of the deceased defendants...
State of Orissa Vs. Mukunda Prasad Mohanty
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-03-1976
Reported in: [1978]42STC116(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. Two questions have been referred for opinion of the court by the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, on an application made by the State of Orissa under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act relating to the period 1968-69. The questions are :(1) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it will be deemed that the assessee was permitted to pay tax at the compounding rate for which he was permitted for the years 1966-67 and 1967-68 by merely filing an application on 20th April, 1968, which is within the period of 45 days for the period for which renewal was required even though he was not expressly permitted by the Sales Tax Officer to pay at the compounding rate ?(2) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order reducing the assessment for the year 1968-69 to the returned figure which was passed at the compounding rate is proper ?2. Undoubtedly, the assessee had the advantage of composition for the two preceding years 1966-67 and 1967-...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›