Orissa Court March 1987 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.
Greaves Cotton and Co. Ltd. Vs. Sales Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-18-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC364(Orissa)
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Commercial Taxes Department.2. The petitioner, who had supplied goods to Paradeep Phosphates and was assessed to sales tax by the Sales Tax Officer, Jagatsinghpur, being aggrieved by the order of assessment, preferred an appeal and moved for stay. The Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax granted a conditional stay and directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 2,29,458. The petitioner thereupon moved the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes contending, inter alia, that his entire turnover comprised of inter-State sales for which C forms had been supplied by Paradeep Phosphates. Hence, there was no taxable turnover on which there could be a levy of Orissa sales tax. The contentions of the petitioner were noted in the 2nd paragraph of the Commissioner's order. The Commissioner observed :After hearing the contentions of the learned Advocate I find some force in the contentions and feel that the demand raised b...
Jaidurga Industries, Jeypore and anr. Vs. Union Bank of India
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-17-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Ori104; 64(1987)CLT196
D.P. Mohapatra, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order of the trial Court dt. 8-12-83 rejecting their, application to set aside the ex parte decree, the appellants have filed this appeal under Order 43, Rule 1, Civil P. C.2. The respondent filed Title Suit No. 47 of 1982 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Jeypore for realisatipn of the mortgage money from the appellants. In the said suit the appellants were granted time till 10-12-82 as the last chance to file their written statement. On that day, since they failed to file the written statement, they were set ex parte and the suit was posted to 15-12-82 for ex parte hearing. The fifteenth of December having been declared a holiday the suit was taken up on 16-12-82 and it was adjourned to 3-1-83 on the application filed by the plaintiff. On3-l-83 ex parte hearing of the suit was taken up and decree was passed on 5-1-83. Thereafter the appellants filed the application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. for setting aside the ex parte decree ta...
Kela Gouda Vs. Krishna Panigrahi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-13-1987
Reported in: AIR1987Ori243
L. Rath, J. 1. The petitioner, whose properties have been sold at the instance of the opposite party No. 2, the Land Development Bank, Aska, on account of loans incurred by him, challenges the sale in this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India as being void. The petitioner availed two loans mortgaging his land measuring A. 10.50 of land. Since there was default in payment of loans, the opposite party No. 2 put the land to sale under Section 91 of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act') on 11-6-1975 which was purchased by the opposite party No. 1 for Rs. 9,000/-. Subsequently, the opposite party No. 1 paid Rs. 6,000/- to the Bank towards the second loan of the petitioner and thus made the land free from all encumbrances.2. A petition was filed on 11-7-1975 by the petitioner under para 1(4) of the schedule to the Act to set aside the sale. The application was rejected by the Principal Officer on 8-10-1975 on which date he also confirmed the sale. ...
indulal Nautamlal and Co. Vs. Collector, Central Excise and Customs, B ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-11-1987
Reported in: AIR1989Ori15; [1990]69CompCas507(Orissa); 1989(22)ECC53; 1987(30)ELT659(Ori)
Rath, J.1. An order passed under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 (Act 45 of 1968) imposing a penalty of Rs. 30,000/- on the petitioner for violation of the provisions of the Gold Control Act (for short, the Act) in respect of primary gold which is no longer available for confiscation is the occasion for this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The petitioner who is a licensed dealer in gold, purchased 2 Kgs. of gold from the Reserve Bank of India on 10-5-1978 and took delivery of the same on 19-5-1978 in a gold sale effected by the Reserve Bank of India in accordance with the authorisation made by the Administrator, After purchasing the gold the petitioner sold the same at Bombay itself through a commission agent who was also a licensed dealer since according to the petitioner, transporting the gold from Bombay to Cuttack was risky and expensive. Subsequent to the disposal of gold by the petitioner, the Administrator imposed restrictions on 2-6-1978 i...
Maa Mangala Primary Fishery Development Co-operative Society, Dhankana ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-11-1987
Reported in: AIR1987Ori214; 63(1987)CLT615
R.C. Patnaik, J. 1. This writ application by Maa Mangala Primary Fishery Development Co-operative Society of Dhenkanal under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India assails the settlement of Hirasagar 'tank' with opposite party No. 5 on lease basis for the year 1985-86.2. The petitioner-society has alleged that since 1983 it had been taking lease of the said tank annually and was engaged in the business of Pisciculture. Being a society, it was expecting grant of lease in its favour as previously. But, to its surprise and misfortune, the same was stealthily settled with opposite party No. 5 without any notice to it regarding the auction. It has assailed the settlement as contrary to the principles framed by the Government for settlement of fisheries, as communicated under letter No. 36773/R dated 27-6-1974 by the Under Secretary to the Government of Orissa in the Revenue Department to the Director of Fisheries vide Annexure-5. The sum and substance of the petitioner's contentions is that ...
Mohavir Prasad JaIn and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-06-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC376(Orissa)
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. This writ application is directed against the orders passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Balasore Circle, Balasore (opposite party No. 2) refusing amendment of the registration certificates of petitioner No. 2. Petitioner No. 2 wanted amendment of its registration certificates bearing Nos. BAC-942 and BA-I 3312 by inclusion of the following items :(1) Generator and its accessories for the purpose of producing electricity for manufacture of goods.(2) Generator spare parts.(3) Diesel oil for the purpose of running generator.2. Petitioner No. 1, who is the director of M/s. Jaikisan Dasmall Jute (P.) Limited at Rupsa in the district of Balasore (petitioner No. 2), a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, has set up a jute mill for manufacture of jute products. The petitioners have alleged that the State of Orissa which was a surplus State in the matter of supply of electricity, gradually became a deficit one due to large scale industrialisation and due to frequ...
Gopabandhu Behera (Dead) and anr. Vs. Tulasi Kashi Patra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: AIR1987Ori247
S.C. Mohapatra, J. 1. This First Appeal by the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 arises out of a final decree for partition.2. Plaintiff and defendant No. 3 are co-widows of Krushna Behera, brother of defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 2 is the son of defendant No. 1. The suit was for recovery of possession and mesne profits from defendants Nos. 1 and 2 of the properties mentioned in Schedules 'A', 'B' and 'C' of the plaint for the benefit of plaintiff and her co-widow, defendant No. 3.3. Plaintiffs case, in short, was that there was partition between her husband and his brother, defendant No. 1, in which Schedule 'A' properties fell to the former's share. Thereafter, the former acquired some properties as mentioned in the plaint. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 were forcibly amalgamating those properties with their lands for which the suit had to be filed. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2, while not disputing the previous partition and self acquisition of some of the properties by the husband of the plaintiff, disp...
Binati Mahakud Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-04-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ763
B.K. Behera, J. 1. The appellant assails the order of conviction recorded against her under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (the Code, for short) by the learned trial Judge sentencing her to undergo imprisonment for life for committing the murder of her husband Rama Behera (to be described hereinafter as 'the deceased') on July 12, 1981 at Kakharupada in the district of Mayurbhanj.2. The order of conviction has been based on the unimpeachable evidence of the sole witness to the occurrence, namely, P.W. 3, who has testified that she had seen the appellant assaulting the deceased by means of a Kodala (M.O.I.), the clear and acceptable evidence with regard to the extra judicial -confession made by the appellant before P. Ws. 4 and 5, who had gone to the spot after the occurrence to the effect that she had killed her husband by means of a Kodala, the voluntary confessional statement (Ext. 10) of the appellant which had duly and legally been recorded by the Judicial Magistrate that she...
Arjun Sahu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-03-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1086
B.K. Behera, J.1.The appellant stood charged under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the Code') with having committed the murder of his brother Lochan Sahu (hereinafter described as 'the deceased') by intentionally causing his death by means of a katari (M.O.I.) on Oct. 13, 1980, at Chamaradhipa in the district of Denkanal and under Section 201 of the Code for having caused the evidence of commission of murder to disappear in order to screen himself from legal punishment by washing the stains of blood on M.O.I.2. The prosecution has mainly relied on the evidence of two witnesses to the occurrence, namely, P.Ws. 2 and 5 and that of P.Ws. 3, 4 and 6 with regard to the extrajudicial confession said to have been made by the appellant before them. As has been submitted by the learned Counsel for both the sides, some incriminating articles, such as a katari (M.O.I.) and two pieces of clothes (MOs. II and III) had been seized in the course of investigation from the possession ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›