Orissa Court March 1982 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.
Chinta Narayanamma Vs. Kholli Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-17-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori183; 54(1982)CLT159
Behera, J. 1. Challenge in this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is to the original and appellate orders (Annexures 1 and 2) passed by the House Rent Controller and the Chief Judicial Magistrate, rejecting the application of the petitioner under the Orissa House Rent Control Act, 1967 (Act 4 of 1968) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and dismissing her claim for eviction of the opposite party No. 1 on the grounds (a) that the opposite party No. 1 was a wilful defaulter in the payment of rent and (b) the house in occupation of the opposite party No. 1 was required for the bona fide requirement of the petitioner. The petitioner seeks a direction from this Court for the eviction of the opposite party No. 1 after quashing Annexures 1 and 2.2. The petitioner had inducted the opposite party No. 1 as a tenant from 25-1-1963 on a monthly rent of Rs. 35/-which later was enhanced to Rs. 45/- per month. The opposite party No. 1, it was alleged, was irregular in the pa...
Sri Durga Thakurani Bije Nijigarh and ors. Vs. Chintamoni SwaIn and or ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori158
Patnaik, J.1. This second appeal which has been referred to the Division Bench for disposal raises the question :'Whether a contract for transfer of property entered into by a marfatdar is specifically enforceable against the deity.'2. To appreciate the point, the facts need be briefly stated :The plaintiff asserts that property in question is the nominal private debottar of defendant No. 1, a private deity of defendants 2 and 3. In partition, the deity and the disputed property fell to the share of defendants Nos. 1 and 2. For meeting the expenses of repairs, eviction of trespassers and undesirable persons and for completion of the construction of the temple, defendants Nos. 1 and 2 on 11-12-1961 entered into an agreement to sell the disputed property in respect of which the plaintiff was a tenant, for Rupees 843/-. The property, having belonged to the Khasmahal, permission was sought from the Khasmahal authorities. Since defendants Nos. 1 and 2 did not honour the agreement by executi...
Bhagabat Sahu Vs. Parbati Samal and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori186; 53(1982)CLT509
ORDERR.N. Misra, C.J.1. The decree-holder in a title suit assails in this application Under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. the order of the Executing Court entered on an application Under Section 47 of the Civil P. C. holding that the final decree was not executable.2. The short facts relevant for the point arising for consideration are these :The plaintiff-petitioner filed two suits, being Money Suit No. 320 of 1965 for realisation of a specific amount and Title Suit No. 129 of 1966 for dissolution of a partnership and rendition of accounts. The two suits were heard analogously and decreed on 22-7-68. The defendant preferred Title Appeal No. 115 of 1968 and Money Appeal No. 31 of 1968 against the respective decrees. Money Appeal No. 31 of 1968 was dismissed and the Title Appeal was allowed. Thereupon the plaintiff-petitioner preferred Second Appeal No. 7 of 1970 against the reversing decree of the Title Appeal and the defendant preferred Second Appeal No. 4 of 1970 against the affirmi...
Municipal Council, Jeypore Municipality Vs. Ghansyam Das Tirth Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori216; 53(1982)CLT454
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. The courts below having granted concurrently a decree for Ks. 868.94, the Municipal Council, Jeypore Municipality, the defendant, has filed this second appeal.2. The plaintiff carrying on business under the name and style of 'Ghansyam Das Tirthadas' filed a suit for recovery of Ks. 4,496.48 from the Municipality by way of refund of octroi paid. The plaintiff urged that he way the sole distributor Ira the district of Koraput for batteries, torch lights, bulbs etc. manufactured by the Union Carbide India Ltd. under the trade name of 'Eveready', Goods were consigned to Jeypore and distribution to various parts of the district used to be made as per demand. Goods intended for sale, use and consumption are chargeable with octroi. Such goods which were later on re-exported by way of distribution to various parts of the district of Koraput outside Jeypore were not liable to octroi and octroi which was collected in respect of such goods by the Municipality at the time of ent...
Mangaraj Barik and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-16-1982
Reported in: 53(1982)CLT515; 1982CriLJ1631
ORDERB.N. Misra, J.1. The petitioners have been convicted under Section 448, I.P.C. and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- each, in default, to simple imprisonment for one month each.2. The prosecution case may be briefly stated. P. W. 10 is the Head Master of Gondia High School and P. Ws. 8 and 9 are the teachers of that school. It is alleged that on 9-5-1975 at about 10.30 a. m. while examination was in progress inside the school a group of persons including the petitioners created disturbances at the gate of the school, then entered inside the school premises and the examination halls and snatched away answer papers from the examinees. P. W. 10 lodged F.I.R. at the police Station at 9 p. m. on the same day. The Police registered the present case against the petitioners and after completion of investigation submitted charge sheet. The petitioners were prosecuted for offences under Sections 448, 323, 426 read with Section 34, I.P.C.3. At the trial 12 witnesses were examined on behal...
P.S. Oberoi Vs. the Orissa Forest Corporation Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-15-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori168
N.K. Das, J. 1. Appellant is a contractor under the Orissa Forest Corporation for transport of round timbers and an agreement had been entered into by the parties on 11-8-1978. The Divisional Manager of the respondent had signed the agreement on behalf of the respondent. As disputes arose between the parties, the present appellant instituted O. S. No. 41/79-I under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act for appointment of an arbitrator. The court appointed one Shri S.H. Rao, an advocate of Jeypore as the arbitrator. The arbitlator called upon the parties to file statements of claims. In pursuance of the notice of the arbitrator, the present appellant appeared and filed his statement of claims, but the respondent did not appear nor participated in the arbitration proceedings. The arbitrator passed an award for Rupees 2,25,000.00. The said award was challenged by the present respondent under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act and the application of the respondent was registered as Misc...
Haribhagat Agarwalla Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-15-1982
Reported in: [1982]51STC355(Orissa)
R.N. Mishra, J.1. At the instance of the assessee this Court under an application mder Section 24(2)(b) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to is the 'Act'), required the Member, Sales Tax Tribunal, to state a case and refer the following question for opinion of the court:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there is sufficient material for holding that the assessee is liable for the tax demand raised against him 2. The assessee is a rice miller in Kalahandi District. In 1969-70 the issessee was a purchasing agent of the Food Corporation of India for paddy. He sold 4,410 pieces of gunny bags to the corporation at the total rate of Rs. 12,127.60. No sales tax was paid on this amount. The Revenue Officer and :he Sub-Divisional Officer had verified the stock held by the assessee on two lifterent dates and had found a huge shortage though their findings were different regarding quantity. The assesing officer found that the assessee had not paid ta...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Ajit Kumar Sur
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-15-1982
Reported in: [1983]140ITR389(Orissa)
R.N. Mishra, C.J.1. Moved by the Revenue, this court under Section 27(3) of the W.T. Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), directed the Wealth-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Branch, to state a case and refer the following common question in respect of assessment years 1964-65 to 1970-71.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalties and whether the finding that the assessee's conduct was not contumacious or deliberate is based on any evidence and, if so, whether the same can be the basis for deleting the penalty levied ?'2. 30th September of the respective year was the due date for submission of the returns. The returns were, however, filed for the first year in August, 1972 (sic) and for the other years on different dates in 1970 (sic). The WTO initiated proceedings, called upon the assessee to show cause and ultimately imposed varying penalties for the years under Section 18(1)(a) of the Act. The AAC did ...
State of Orissa Vs. Habib Rahimutulla and Co.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-15-1982
Reported in: [1982]51STC403(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, C.J.1. These are references made by the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act at the instance of the revenue. The following three questions have been referred :(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, legally correct to say that on reading of the terms of agreement the assessee is only required to charge Rs. 3.25 for each quintal of rice supplied and not as consolidated commission to cover the procurement charges including handling, storage, interest, shortage, gunny depreciation, etc. and milling charges ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, should not the contract as per terms of the agreement be held as divisible ?(3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, is correct in law to have held that on the sale of gunny bags sold to the Food Corporation of India and the Col...
New Ganguram Sweets Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-15-1982
Reported in: [1983]52STC68(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, C.J. 1. At the assessee's instance this Court by order dated 6th February, 1979, directed the Additional Sales Tax Tribunal to state a case and refer the following question for opinion of the Court:'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, there is justification to hold that the daily sales turnover of the assessee should be determined at Rs. 480 as done by the Tribunal ?'2. The assessee is a registered dealer carrying on confectionery business at Bhubaneswar. For the assessment period 1973-74, the assessee disclosed sales at Rs. 58,387.65 and for the following year at Rs. 1,17,423.25. The assessing officer rejected these book figures as untrue on the finding that the assessee was not maintaining his account of sales and purchases properly. The assessing officer enhanced the gross turnover to Rs. 1,42,500 for the first year and to Rs. 2,55,500 for the second year by resorting to best of judgment. The assessee in first appeal disputed the quantum by branding it a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »