Orissa Court August 1991 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.
Pradipta Gangadev and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-01-1991
Reported in: 1991(II)OLR360
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. In this application under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have prayed to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing orders of the Revenue Officer and appellate and revisional authorities (Annexures 1, 5 and 6) in a ceiling surplus proceeding under the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act)2 Late Bhanuganga Trivuban Dev is the land-holder. Petitioners are his two major married sons separated as such before 26-9-1970. Bhanuganga and petitioners filed three separate returns. Petitioners were treated as separate land-holders and as such their lands were dealt with separately where they were allowed to retain lands within the ceiling area. Bhanuganga with his widow and his daughter was treated to be a family as defined in Section 37 (b) of the Act. Bhanuganga not being satisfied with determination of his ceiling surplus lands approached this Court in OJC 83 of 1977. By decision dated 21-10-1 81, revisional order was...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Orissa Oil Industries Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-01-1991
Reported in: (1992)103CTR(Ori)178; [1992]193ITR183(Orissa); [1992]60TAXMAN123(Orissa)
ORDER--Assessment order under s. 144B--Appeal preferred thereagainst--CIT had no jurisdiction to revise order.HELD :Approval of draft assessment order of the IAC is not the assessment order, which is to be passed by the ITO finally after receipt of approval. The CIT has power to revise the order of the ITO and while so revising may also examine the correctness of approval. But where an appeal has been filed against the order of assessment, such order merges with the appellate order and there is no scope for the CIT to revise the order of assessment by the ITO.#Sec. 144B stands omitted w.e.f. 1-4-1989.Income Tax Act 1961 s.263(1) ...
Gadadhar Pati Vs. Banshidhar Pati
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-01-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1811
ORDERB.N. Dash, J.1. The appellate modifying judgment is under challenge in this revision.2. The parties are step brothers being the sons of same father and their houses were adjacent to each other in village Katijhuri, P.S. Baisinga, district Mayurbhanj. The opposite party, as complainant, filed the complaint on 9-7-1982 alleging that there was a partition of their ancestral properties long long ago between him and the petitioner and they were in separate possession of their respective shares and that on 6-7-1982 at about 7 a.m. while the complainant was performing his routine morning duties, the petitioner approached him in a furious mood making allegation of uprooting the fence and the pillars erected by him. It was also alleged that when the opposite party replied that he had merely mend the fence, the petitioner abused him in filthy language and came rushing with a sword, which he got from his house in the meanwhile, shouting on the way to kill him and out of fear the opposite par...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›