Orissa Court December 1981 Judgments
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Ramniklal D. Mehta
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-16-1981
Reported in: (1982)28CTR(Ori)69; [1982]136ITR729(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, C.J.1. In terms of a direction given by this court under Section 27(3) of the W.T. Act at the instance of the revenue, the Cuttack Bench of the Wealth-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated these cases and has referred the following common question for the opinion of the court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the imposition of penalty in each of the years in question ?'2. We are concerned with assessment years 1965-66 to 1971-72. For all these years, the assessee filed his return on November 2, 1972, although he had been served with notices under Section 17 of the Act for the three latter assessment years out of these, namely, 1969-70 to 1971-72. Proceedings for the imposition of penalty were initiated for the non-filing of returns and as the assessing officer was not satisfied about the existence of any reasonable cause on the basis of the explanation offered, he imposed various amounts of penalties for these ye...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ravi Talkies
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-16-1981
Reported in: [1982]137ITR176(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, C.J.1. These are references made by the Cuttack Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the I. F. Act at the instance of the revenue and the following common question has been referred for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and ona true interpretation of Sections 271(1)(a), 139 (1) and (2) of the Income-tax Act, the Tribunal was right in directing that penalty should be calculated only from the date of filing the return fixed by the service of the notices under Sections 148 and 139(2)?' 2. Assessee is a firm, its principal business being the running of a cinematograph exhibition hall. The relevant years are 1968-69 and 1969-70. Admittedly, the assessee had taxable income for both the years. Returns for these years were due by 30th of June, 1968, and 30th of June, 1969. Notices for both the years were served on the assessee on February 19, 1970, for the first year under Section 148 and for the second year und...
Tag this Judgment!Godavaris Mahabidyalaya and anr. Vs. Director of Public Instruction (H ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-14-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori101; 53(1982)CLT323
Das, J. 1. Petitioner No. 2 is the Member and Secretary of petitioner No. 1 which is an aided college. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the jurisdiction of the opposite party, the Director of Public Instruction (H. E.), Orissa superseding the governing body of petitioner No. 1.The case of the petitioner is that the governing body of the college was reconstituted on 26-7-1979, under An-nexure-1. The governing body was managing the affairs of the college properly. Under political pressure, some disturbances were created through some teachers of the institution. On 19-2-81 opp. party No. 1 issued a notice under Section 11(1) of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 framing charges against the governing body and asking to show cause why the governing body should not superseded. Eleven members of the governing body showed cause, but in spite of that the opposite party superseded the governing body. It is stated that the order superseding the governing body as well a...
Tag this Judgment!Sanatan Sahu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-14-1981
Reported in: 53(1982)CLT139; 1982CriLJ936
ORDERB.K. Behera, J.1. The petitioner's conviction has been recorded Under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for having exposed for sale in his grocery shop at Akul Hat adulterated jira meant for human consumption on the 25th May, 1978, which was detected by the Food Inspector (P.W. 4) in the presence of the Sanitary Inspector (P.W. 2) and a peon (P.W. 1) of the office of the Chief District Medical Officer besides a local gentleman (PW 3). Suspecting this article of food to be adulterated P.W. 4 purchased for the purpose of analysis, after giving notice, 450 grams of jira, as per Ext. 2, the cash memo, for Rs. 9.50 and this article, on analysis, was found by the Public Analyst to be adulterated as per the report, Ext. 8. The petitioner was prosecuted and at the trial, four witnesses for the prosecution were examined to bring home the charge to the petitioner. The case of the petitioner was that the article purchased by...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Kasi Biswanath Dev Vs. Paramananda Routrai and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-10-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori80; 53(1982)CLT206
ORDERDr. B.N. Misra, J.1. Defendant No. 1 in a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction has carried this application under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. assailing the order of the Second Munsif of Cut-tack dated third October, 1980.2. The trial of the suit opened on 17-8-1981 when examination of witnesses on the plaintiff's side began. On 14-9-1981, plaintiff applied to the Court for re-issue of summons to the Settlement Officer for production of certain documents. Summons was ordered to be issued at plaintiff's risk and the suit was adjourned to 15-9-1981. On 15-9-1981 as the summons had not returned after service, it was directed to be reissued by adiourning the suit to the next date i. e. 16-9-1981 on terms of costs and plaintiff was directed to pay adjournment cost of Rs. 15/-. On 16-9-1981 the witnesses did not appear. The trial Court closed the evidence on the plaintiff's side and witnesses of the defendant were examined. The trial continued and defendant's witness...
Tag this Judgment!Mahanta Srikrushna Chandra Das Vs. Rajkishore Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-10-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori123; 53(1982)CLT444
N.K. Das, J.1. Appellant was the recognised Mahant of Khambakul Math, P.S. Balikuda in the District of Cuttack. The Commissioner of Endowments has recommended Under Section 35 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act to the Government for approval to disqualify the appellant from continuing as Mahant for a period of five years. The appeal is directed against that order. The charges levelled against the appellant were that he sold away 7.08 acres of land though permission had been obtained by him to execute permanent lease-deeds in respect of the said lands; he spent money for construction of the temple without plan and estimate being sanctioned by the Commissioner, he alienated some land of the institution either by himself or by his authorised agent without permission; he also alienated some Anabadi land without permission in his own name; he wilfully and persistently defaulted in discharging his duties and also defaulted in payment of contributions. He was asked to show cause and...
Tag this Judgment!Bhuban Mahanandia and anr. Vs. Parameswar Sa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-08-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori137; 54(1982)CLT191
ORDERR.N. Misra, C.J.1. Two of the judgment-debtors are petitioners in this application under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. which is directed against rejection of an objection under Section 47 of the Code in an execution case instituted to execute the decree obtained in Money Suit No. 68 of 1974 from the Subordinate Judge of Sundergarh.2. The said suit was filed by the opposite party to recover the consideration money, registration expenses and costs of improvement to the lands totalling Rupees 5,600/-. On 18-10-1968, the four defendants of the suit had sold 1.30 acres of land for a consideration of Rs. 5,000/-by a registered sale deed. In Miscellaneous Case No. 81 of 1972 before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sundergarh, under the Orissa Land Reforms Act, the transfer was declared as void as it was in contravention of Section 22 of that Act and restoration of possession was ordered by the Sub-Divisional Officer. On 11-11-1973, the defendants forcibly took away possession of the property...
Tag this Judgment!Orissa State Commercial Transport Corporation, Cuttack Vs. Smt. Dhumal ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-07-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori70; 53(1982)CLT167
N.K. Das, J.1. In an accident by truck ORU 7741 belonging to the appellant Corporation, three persons namely. Bansidhar Mohanty, Kulamoni Das and Sunakar Mallick died and Nachha Swain was injured. This happened at the time of unloading in the jetty No. 1 of the Paradip Port on 26-4-1975 at about 3 A.M. M. A. No. 93/79 relates to the claim made by the widow and other claimants of Bansidhar. M. A. No. 90/79 relates to the claim made by the widow and other claimants of Kulamoni, M. A. 88/79 relates to the claim made by the widow and other claimants of Sunakar Mallick, The injured Nachha Swain is the claimant in M. A. 94 of 1979.2. Their case is that the vehicle was being driven by one S. Appa Rao, an employee of the appellant After this truck was unloaded, the coolies, namely, three deceased persons and the injured along with others, were engaged in filling up the unloaded cromite ore into the baskets behind the truck for the purpose of loading the said ore into waiting barges. The driver...
Tag this Judgment!Hadibandhu Ho and ors. Vs. Luchia Ho and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-05-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori73; 53(1982)CLT214
Patnaik, J.1. The plaintiffs, who have been unsuccessful before the courts below, filed the suit for declaration of title, confirmation or in the alternative recovery of possession and for grant of mandatory injunction restraining the defendants from going upon the suit property.2. Their case was that their father Matai was the owner of plots Nos. 395 and 425 in village Ghulghulia. Not being capable of cultivating his entire land, he got the suit land cultivated through Randa, the deceased father of defendants 1 and 2. In April, 1975, when he went with Ms labourers for conducting agricultural operation, the defendants obstructed and threatened with evil conseq uences. So an application under Section 145 Cr. P. C. was filed. Since the proceeding was protracted, the suit was filed. The plea of the defendants was that the property was sold orally to Randa their father, for a consideration of Rs. 90/- about 30 years back and possession was delivered to him. After the death of their father,...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mani Kumari Dei Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-05-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori108; 53(1982)CLT375
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner who secured a loan of Rs. 10,000/- under the Middle Income Group Housing Scheme has sought shelter under the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court for issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the proceedings in Certificate Case No. 11 (DIO) of 1970 (Certificate Case No. 69 of 1965-66) and certain orders of attachment and sale of the property in the said certificate proceeding.2. A proceeding under the OrissaPublic Demands Recovery Act, 1962 was ptarted on a requisition sent by theDistrict Loans Officer, Cuttack. The certificate was drawn up and filed on 17-12-1966. Notice was issued to the certificate-debtor. Though there is some controversy regarding service of notice, that question is not relevant, Order dated 14-9-66 shows that in execution of distress warrant, moveables belonging to the petitioner were attached and sale of such articles was directed to be held on 10-10-66. The proceeding thereafter went through a chequered career. It is gathered f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »