Orissa Court April 1979 Judgments
Collector Vs. Anasuya Debi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-30-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori189; 48(1979)CLT7
R.N. Misra, J. 1. These two appeals by the Collector of Cuttack are directed against award of interest from the date of dispossession preceding the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in a reference under Section 18 of the Act. 2. The learned Subordinate Judge found that dispossession took place in 1961 but by then there was no notification under the Act though acquisition was contemplated. Learned Additional Government Advocate raises two contentions :-- (i) There is no acceptable evidence of dispossession at any time prior to the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act; and (ii) There is no power vested in the court for award of interest from a date prior to the notification. 3. The claimant's husband has been examined as P. W. 1 and has clearly stated:-- 'State took possession in Feb. 1961, in advance. A saw mill was started on the land acquired and the same functioned in 1964.' The witness was not cross-examined on the point. The Land Acquisition ...
Tag this Judgment!Dhaneswar Mahanty and ors. Vs. Sitanath Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-30-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori177
Misra, J.1. Defendants are in appeal against the decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Puri allowing plaintiffs' claim for title and recovery of possession of the disputed property.2. Plaintiffs filed a suit on 1-12-1965 alleging that the disputed property which is a house and the property appurtenant to it within municipal holding No. 426 of Ward No. 8 of Puri Town happened to be their ancestral property. Defendants 1 to 3 are close relations of the plaintiffs. Father of defendants 2 and 3 came to seek service at Puri and was allowed to remain with the plaintiffs' father in the disputed house as an act of compassion. He continued to live there till his death in 1930. Defendant No. 3 was then a small boy and was brought up in the house by a maid servant who died in 1960. Plaintiffs' father died in 1936 and their mother lived in the disputed house till she was moved to the village in 1956. The house was under the occupation of the maid servant and was taken care of by defend...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Orissa Textile Mills Ltd. and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-19-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori165; 48(1979)CLT245
R.N. Misra, J. 1. Defendants -- the Union of India representing the Central Railway and the South Eastern Railway --have carried this appeal against the judgment and decree of the First Additional Siibordiate Judge at Cuttack decreeing plaintiffs' suit for damages.2. The Orissa Textile Mills Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'Company') is a public company having its registered office and factory at Choudwar, off Cuttack. A hundred bales of F. P. cotton procured by the Company were consigned in perfect condition from Shendurni, a station located on the Central Railway, to Charba-tia, a station on the South Eastern Railway, for being delivered to the Company under Invoice No. 1 and Railway Receipt No. 218917 dated 6-2-1968. During transit, the consignment was badly damaged by fire and water and open delivery was given to the Company on assessment basis on 11-5-1968 vide Ext. 8 indicating damage to the consignment in the following way: (i) damage to 7 bales at 50% (ii) damage to 55 ...
Tag this Judgment!Bisra Stone Lime Co. Limited Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-18-1979
Reported in: 48(1979)CLT13; [1979]44STC418(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. The petitioner in these two writ applications is a public limited company, having its registered office at Calcutta and its place of business at Biramitrapur, within the jurisdiction of the Sales Tax Officer, Rourkela Circle (opposite party No. 1). The petitioner is a dealer registered under the Orissa Sales Tax Act bearing Registration No. RL-177 and under the Central Sales Tax Act bearing Registration No. RLC-28. In these two applications under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenge is to the order of assessment for the year 1974-75. O.J.C. No. 450 of 1978 is related to the demand made under the Central Act, while the connected application is against the demand under the State Act.2. The assessee is a lessee in respect of several mines belonging to the Government of Orissa and it carries on the business of mining and selling of minerals like limestone, dolomite, etc., to several steel industries like the Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., the Indian Iron and Steel Co....
Tag this Judgment!Draupadi Patel and ors. Vs. Mangal Prasad Patel and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-13-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori190; 47(1979)CLT567
ORDERS.K. Ray, C.J.1. This is a revision under Section 13(3) of the Orissa Merged Territories (Village Offices Abolition) Act, 1963 (hereinafter called the 'Act'). The sole question of law raised is that the Board of Revenue acted without jurisdiction in allowing the review application (Review Case No. 5 of 1977) filed before it by reviewing its own order dated 28-3-1977 under which Section A. No. 43 of 1973 had been dismissed, and then proceeding to direct the Collector to dispose of Review Appeal No. 44 of 1971 on merits. To understand the implication of this question, it is necessary to state briefly the history of this litigation. 2. In a proceeding under Section 5 (1) of the Act, 8.29 acres of Bhogra land in village Mangaspur were settled in favour of one Mangal prasad patel of Kurla (hereinafter referred to as Patel of Kurla). This proceeding was contested by one bearing the same name, but of a different village Mangaspur (hereinafter referred to as Patel of Mangaspur). This orde...
Tag this Judgment!Biramoni Sahu Vs. Collector of Customs and Excise and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-11-1979
Reported in: 1979(4)ELT541(Ori)
S. Acharya, J.1. Certain goods and some cash were seized from the petitioner by the officers of opposite parties 1 and 2 on 26-9-1976. By Annexure 5 dated 30-6 1977, the petitioner was informed to take delivery of the goods seized from him, excluding the seized primary gold and the trunk from which gold was recovered on depositing Rs 4,379.96 paise towards the expenditure incurred for transportation, storage, security arrangement etc. for the said valuables.2. The learned Counsel appearing for the parties state that the silver articles which had been seized have been handed over to the Income-tax Department, and the seized cash has been returned to the petitioner, but the seized primary gold is still with the Customs Department.3. The petitioner by his writ petition has challenged only the portion of the order in Annexure 5 directing him to pay the above mentioned amount.4. From the Counter filed by the opposite parties 1 and 2, it appears that these opposite parties kept the seized go...
Tag this Judgment!Biramani Sahu Vs. Collector, Custom and Excise and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-11-1979
Reported in: 48(1979)CLT101; 1980CriLJ54
S. Acharya, J.1. Certain goods and some cash were seized from the petitioner by the officers of opposite parties 1 and 2 on 26-9-1976. By Annexure 5, dated 30-6-1977, the petitioner was informed to take delivery of the goods seized from him, excluding the seized primary gold and the trunk from which gold was recovered, on depositing Rs. 4,379.96 Paise towards the expenditure incurred for transportation, storage, security arrangement etc. for the said valuables.2. The learned Counsel appearing for the parties state that the silver articles which had been seized have been handed over to the Income-tax Department and the seized cash has been returned to the petitioner, but the seized primary gold is still with the Customs Department.3. The petitioner by this writ petition has challenged only the portion of the order in Annexure 5 directing him to pay the above-mentioned amount.4. From the counter filed on behalf of opposite parties 1 and 2 it appears that these opposite parties kept the s...
Tag this Judgment!Adhikari Gopinath Das Vs. Nirmal Chandra Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-09-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori159; 48(1979)CLT93
ORDERS. Acharya, J. 1. This revision arises out of the order dated 5-12-1977 of the Munsif, Puri in Original Suit No. 179 of 1976-1. By the impugned order the court below has decided that the suit has abated under the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (Orissa Act 21 of 1972) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), as the area comprising the suit lands has come under the Consolidation Proceedings.2. The reliefs prayed for in this suit are; (i) realisation of damages caused to the plaintiff due to the unlawful trespass and illegal acts of the defendants on the suit land; (ii) restraining the defendants by a permanent injunction not to commit any further act of damages or to interfere with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit lands; and (iii) for other consequential reliefs.3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the prayer for permanent injunction or the interlocutory injunction which has already been gra...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›