Orissa Court April 1988 Judgments
Moningi Sriramulu Vs. Gudisha Trinath Rao and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-29-1988
Reported in: AIR1988Ori204; 66(1988)CLT96
Agrawal, C.J. 1. This application by the tenant is for quashing the order dated 4-2-1987 passed by the House Rent Controller under Section 7(3) of the Orissa House Rent Control Act directing him to clear up entire arrears from Nov. 1983 to 8-1-1987 by 17-2-1987.2. The question that has been referred for consideration of the larger Bench is as to whether the House Rent Controller under Section 7(3) of the Act can direct a tenant for remitting the arrears of rent falling due subsequent to the filing of the eviction application.3. The eviction application in question was filed before the House Rent Controller on 11-1 -1984 for the petitioner's eviction, inter alia, alleging that the tenant was a defaulter having not paid the rent since Nov. 1983. The case of the petitioner in his written statement in this regard is that since the landlord refused to receive the rents for the months of Nov. and Dec. 1983 and January, 1984 intentionally when it was sent by money order, he had been depositin...
Tag this Judgment!Souri Prasad SwaIn Vs. Rani Jayashree Devi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-27-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ori81; 66(1988)CLT54
Agrawal, C.J.1. When this writ application was listed before a Division Bench, the correctness of certain observations made in three earlier Bench decisions of this Court was doubted, and accordingly it referred the matter to the Full Bench and that is how it has come before us.2. In essence, the question falling for determination is the construction of Clause (i) of Section 7(2) of the Orissa House Rent Control Act, 1967 (for short 'the Act') dealing with 'default' on the part of the tenant andthe proviso thereto under which the House Rent Controller has to record a finding as towhether the default was 'wilful'.3. Facts : --The tenant-petitioner is in occupation of a room in the building of opposite party No. 1. The tenancy has commenced on 1-4-1975 under a Written agreement on a monthly rent of Rs. 180/-. According to the terms of the agreement, the rent for each month was to be paid by the 5th. of that month itself. A fresh agreement was executed between the parties on 14-1977 (Ext....
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Aparajita Dibya Vs. Binod Behari Patra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-27-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ori271; 66(1988)CLT557
ORDERS.C. Mohapatra, J.1. The Stamp Reporter has raised an objection that the second appeal is barred by limitation by three days. Mr. S. K. Mohanty, the learned counsel for the appellant, submits that in case the period taken for filing the requisites for obtaining the copy would not be taken into consideration, the Stamp Report would be correct and as a measure of abundant caution, he has filed the application for condonation of delay,2. Mr. Mohanty relied upon Rule 20 ofChap. I of Part IV in the General; Rules and Circular Orders (Civil), Vol. 1 of this Court under which three days are granted to deliver the requisites for copy. The rule reads as follows:'The requisite folios and stamps shall be filed before the Head Comparing Clerk within three days of the giving of the notice prescribed in Rule 19. If this is not done the application may be rejected If the application has been rejected a note to that effect shall be made against the entry of the application in the register, No. (R...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa and ors. and Udyog Silpa P. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Punjab N ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-27-1988
Reported in: [1991]71CompCas220(Orissa)
V. Gopalaswamy, J.1. The facts giving rise to the present appeals are briefly stated thus: The Punjab National Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'the bank') filed the suit, T. M. S. No. 79 of 1978), in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, against defendant No. 1, Udyog Silpa P. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the company'), and seventeen other defendants, defendants Nos. 2 to 18. Defendant No. 1 company was engaged in manufacturing iron pipes, fittings and allied materials and used to supply the same to the Government of Orissa (defendant No. 11) for being used by the public health department. The defendant No. 1-company, as a constituent of the plaintiff-bank, was enjoying credit facilities from the bank to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000 against Government bills and cheques drawn in favour of the defendant-company towards the value of the manufactured iron goods supplied from time to time during the relevant period. The defendant-company, through its directors, entered int...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Polaki Butchi Babu.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-25-1988
Reported in: (1988)74CTR(Ori)29; [1988]174ITR430(Orissa)
AGRAWAL C.J. - This court has called for a statement of case on the following question of law from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, on an application filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act (for short 'the Act') :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in coming to the conclusion that the correct status of the assessee should be Hindu undivided family ?'The assessment years involved in these two cases are 1974-75 and 1975-76. The facts may be briefly stated :Polaki Butchi Babu and his father, Polaki Srirangam, were partners of the firm Polaki Srirangam and Sons at Berhampur and were being assessed as individuals. Srirangam died on December 22, 1968, when the firm was reconstituted, the partners being Polaki Butchi Babu and his two sons. The capital standing to the credit of Srirangam, on being inherited by Polaki Butchi Babu and his sons was credited to the account 'Polaki Butchi ...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Mohan Ghosh and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-22-1988
Reported in: 66(1988)CLT46; [1988]71STC73(Orissa)
H.L. Agrawal, C.J. 1. The common question that arises for consideration in all these five reference cases made under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') by the Sales Tax Tribunal is as to whether watery coconuts are liable to purchase tax or sales tax. 2. In the first four cases, the dealer is M/s. Madan Mohan Ghosh and in the fifth one, M/s. Bhadrak Coconut Store. The period in the first four cases is 1976-77 and 1978-79 and in the fifth case it is 1977-78. 3. According to Section 3-B of the Act, inserted in 1958, the State Government may by notification declare any goods or class of goods to be liable to tax on turnover of purchases. Once any goods is declared under this provision, then no tax is payable on the sales of such goods or class of goods. It may also be mentioned that there is a great difference in the rate of purchase tax and sales tax. Therefore, in this litigation the dealers have taken the stand that the commodity in question, namely, ...
Tag this Judgment!Aska Co-operative Sugar Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: (1988)74CTR(Ori)99; [1988]174ITR311(Orissa)
S. C. MOHAPATRA. J. - The petitioner in these five writ applications under article 226 of the Constitution of India is a co-operative society registered under the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1951, and is liable to pay tax on its income from its business under the Income-tax Act, 1961. Since the question involved in all these writ applications is the same, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.Amongst others, the petitioner carries on business in the manufacture of sugar and for that purpose, it has set up a factory with plant and machinery. Sugar is produced seasonally and for the purpose of production, the factory runs on several shifts every day during seasons of production. While submitting the returns of its income for the years 1972-73 to 1976-77, the petitioner claimed depreciation to be deducted from the gross profits to compute the income liable to tax. The Income-tax Officer having reduced the claim of depreciation, these five writ applica...
Tag this Judgment!Sasikanta Samantaray and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-17-1988
Reported in: (1999)87CALLT498; 1998CriLJ3029
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Government Advocate on behalf of the State of Orissa.2. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed with the following prayer :-It is humbly prayed this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the cognizance of order dated 7-5-1990 by learned S.D.J.M.(S), Cuttack in G.R. Case No. 213/87 and furthermore also be pleased to quash the cognizance taken against the petitioners in aforesaid G.R. case.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that when the case is pending and lingering for above ten years, no useful purpose will be served by further continuing the proceeding. His second contention is that the incident relates to an occurrence which occurred during the student days of the petitioners and at present pursuing that matter will not enure in any benefit to the Society and apart from that if the proceeding is allowed to continue, it will amou...
Tag this Judgment!Mahalaxmi Flour and Oil Mills and anr. Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-16-1988
Reported in: [1988]71STC70(Orissa)
H.L. Agrawal, C.J. and D.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. This application has been filed for quashing the orders passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Puri II Circle, rejecting the refund application filed under Section 14-A of the Orissa Sales Tax Act (then in force), confirmed on revision by the Commissioner.2. Petitioner No. 2 had started a flour mill in the month of December, 1974 in the name and style of M/s. Mahalaxmi Flour and Oil Mills which went into production on 11th December, 1974. In course of the milling operation, the petitioners were supplied wheat from the Food Corporation of India and the District Collector, Puri. According to the industrial policy of the Government under the notification dated 11th November, 1969, the petitioners claimed that they should have been exempted from paying tax on the raw materials purchased for the industry for a period of five years. It appears that the petitioners' suppliers, namely, the Food Corporation of India and the Collector, Puri, were subjected ...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Tobacco and Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-15-1988
Reported in: 66(1988)CLT78; 1988(16)ECC245; 1989(22)LC576(Orissa); 1989(39)ELT15(Ori)
ORDERG.B. Patnaik, J.1. The demand of duty to the extent of Rs. 4,986.10 on tobacco for nonproduction of triplicate copy of the application, made by opposite party No. 5 in exercise of powers under Rule 156-B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'), annexed as annexures 1 and 2 to the writ petition, is being challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition.2. The petitioner is a wholesale dealer in tobacco and having received an order from the consignee (opposite party No. 6) for despatch of 43 bales of Butts Fadar Tobac co applied for permission for removal from the warehouse and for despatch to the consignee (opposite party No. 6) at Kesinga. The Inspector of Central Excise, Bargarh, issued necessary order for such removal whereafter the petitioner removed the said tobacco from the warehouse and despatched the same to Kesinga. In accordance with the Rules, the petitioner presented an application in triplicate for such removal and after due endorse...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »