Orissa Court January 1992 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.
B.B. Sahu Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-1992
Reported in: [1993]199ITR212(Orissa)
A. Pasayat, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following questions have been referred to this court for adjudication under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench (in short ' the Tribunal') :' (1) Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned authorities below are correct in law in including the salary income of the assessee in his hands in place of his wife?(2) Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the amended provision of Explanation 1 in inserting Clause (ii) by the Finance Act, 1979, coming into effect from April 1, 1980, will apply to the facts of this case, whose accounting year has ended prior to March 31, 1980 '2. From the statement of case, we find that Sri B.B. Sahu thereinafter referred to as ' the assessee') filed his return of income for the assessment year 1980-81, wherein it was indicated that a sum of Rs. 16,725 received by him as managing director ...
Tareswar Naik and anr. Vs. Satyabadi Lenka and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT198; 1992(II)OLR18
K.C. Jagadeb Roy, J.1. The present petitioners are the First Party members in a 144 proceeding initiated by them in the Court of the Executive Magistrate, Bhanjanagar numbered as Misc. Case No. 390/84 and by order dated 30-10-1984 the Court prohibited both the parties to come over the disputed land. The land in dispute consists of a portion of the Survey No. 69(1) measuring Ac. 0.60 cents out of a total area of Ac 2.04 cents. As is revealed from the order of the Executive Magistrate, the claim of the First Party was that the land originally belonged to the Kotha of village Netanga consisting of one Agadhu Khandual and other 21 persons and in the year 1929 the Kothadars orally gifted the land to the village deity Sri Sri Gopinath Swamy. Since then the disputed land is under peaceful possession of the deity Sri Gopinatth Swamy and is shown in the property register of the deity. The First Party No. 1 being the Managing Trustee of the deity had leased out the land in public auction along w...
Debasis Singh Samant Vs. the State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Ori11
G.B. Patnaik, J.1. Petitioner is a lessee in respect of 96 hectares of land for period 1989-90 to 1993-94 in river Brahmani in village Gengutia under the provisions of the Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1983. Under the terms of the agreement, the royalty had been fixed at Rs. 75,255/- per annum which was to be paid in advance by the lessee every year. The petitioner was further liable to pay the surface rent of Rs. 887/- and cess of Rs. 887/- every year. While the petitioner was continuing as a lessee under the aforesaid terms and agreement, opposite party No. 2 by letter dated 2-2-1990 demanded payment of cess at the rate of Rs. 13,858/ in place of the contractual rate of Rs. 887/-per year and the notice demanding the same has been annexed as Annexure-2. The petitioner had to pay the said amount under pressure. The Government of Orissa framed the Orissa Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1990, which came into force with effect from 29-8-1990 and under Schedule I of the said Rule...
Jeenu Plast India (Private) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Orissa State Financial C ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Ori196; [1993]76CompCas366(Orissa)
G.S. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioners challenge the seizure of the industrial unit named Jeenu Plast India (Private) Ltd. by the Orissa State Financial Corporation in exercise of their power under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') inter alia, on the ground that the said power has been exercised mala fide and not in compliance with the rules of law. It has also been alleged that the action of the opposite parties is for oblique purpose and without authority of law.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner No. 1 is a small-scale industrial unit registered under the Indian Companies Act. It availed of financial assistance from the Corporation in the year 1986 and machineries were installed in the year 1988. Though the machineries were installed in the year 1988, but on account of lack of availability of working capital, the unit could not go into production until 1990. In 1990, as alleged by the petitioners, on accoun...
Rama Chandra Das Vs. Kailash Chandra Gochhayat and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-18-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1621
ORDERS.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Termination of a proceeding under Section 107, Criminal Procedure Code by application of Section 116(6), Cr.P.C. by the impugned appellate order is grievance of the petitioner in this revision.2. Proceeding against opposite parties Nos. 1 to 22 under Section 107, Cr.P.C., was initiated at instance of petitioner on 15-10-1985. First witness was examined on 29-11-1986. Even accepting that 20-11-1986 shall be the date of commencement, enquiry is to be completed within six months i.e. by 20-5-1987. Before expiry of six months, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor raised the question of extension of time on basis of which learned Magistrate extended the period by further six months. Final order was passed on 31-8-1987. Opposite Parties preferred appeal. Learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the appeal on various grounds one of which is that no reason was given to extend the period of enquiry. This is grievance of petitioner.3. Extension of the period of enquiry ...
Tirtha Pradhan and ors. Vs. Balabhadra Pradhan and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Ori50; 73(1992)CLT490
ORDERB.N. Dash, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 4-10-1986 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Deogarh under Order 32, Rule 15 C.P.C. allowing Ratnakar Pradhan (O.P. No. 2) to represent Balabhadra Pradhan (O.P, No. 1) as his guardian.2. The petitioners as plaintiffs instituted Title Suit No. 4/1985 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Deogarh against the O.P. 1 who was more than 90 years of age for partition of certain joint family properties. In that suit O.P. 2 filed a petition to allow him to act as guardian and next friend of O.P. 1 alleging that the O.P. 1 due to his old age was physically and mentally infirm. The petitioners filed objection to this O.P. No. 1, after his appearance in Court, was sent to the Sub-Divisional Medical Officer, Daogarh for medical examination. It appears that the Medicine Specialist attached to the Sub-Divisional Hospital, Deogarh examined O.P. No. 1 on 11-7-1986 and on the basis of the opinion further by him, the S.D.M.O., ...
Rama Chandra Sahoo Vs. Benudhar Jena and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-1992
Reported in: 1992(I)OLR442
B.L. Hansaria, C.J.1. The Secretary is present in person, so also the Headmaster. It is stated by the Headmaster that he was allowed to join yesterday in the school. According to us, this has happened because of the very strict view taken by us on 15-1-1992, when we made clear to the Secretary who was personally present and was then being represented by Shri K. K. Swain, that if by today we would not be satisfied that he had not violated this Court's order, we would have no alternative but to award a sentence of imprisonment on him. That day itself, we were not satisfied with the replies being given by the Secretary which were contradictory to each other as noted in our order dated 15-1-1992. As a submission had, however, been made on that date by Shri Swain, who withdraws his appearance today, that Senior Advocate Shri B. Misra who had been engaged by the contemner would like to make his submissions today, we did not pass any final order on that day. Shri Swain has stated to us today ...
Motilal Chunilal Rathor Vs. Pani Bai and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-16-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Ori155
ORDERS.C. Mahapatra, J. 1. This civil revision arises out of an order refusing prayer of defendant No. 1 to hear two suits analogously.2. Title Suit No. 161 of 1987 has been filed by opposite party No. 3 for declaration that petitioner is not the adopted son of Panchanan and for partition. Petitioner filed a written statement in the said suit claiming to be adopted son of Panchanan. In the written statement opposite party No. 1 has claimed that petitioner is not the adopted son and they are continuing in possession on the basis of succession.3. Opposite Party No. 1 filed an application for stay of hearing of Title Suit No.1 of 1989 under Section 10, Civil Procedure Code. Petitioner filed an application for analogous hearing of both suits. Both applications were heard together and in a common order, application for stay of latter suit has been allowed and application for analogous hearing of both suits has been rejected. This is grievance of petitioner.4. There is no dispute that issue ...
Smt. Susama Patnaik and anr. Vs. Managing Committee, Buxi Jagabandhu E ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-16-1992
Reported in: 73(1992)CLT494; (1992)IILLJ256Ori; 1992(I)OLR503
B.L. Hansaria, C.J.1. The two petitioners were serving as Assistant Teachers in Buxi Jagabandhu English Medium School, Bhubaneswar. As the monthly salary paid to the petitioners was nominal inasmuch as the same was Rs. 100/- in so far as the petitioner in O.J.C. No. 4119/88 is concerned and Rs. 250/- qua the other petitioner, to augment their income, they wanted to take up agency work of Peerless General Finance and Investment Company. By communication dated January 22, 1985, the Secretary of the School permitted the petitioners to undertake the above work beyond school hours without affecting the normal duty as teachers. Subsequently, however, the Secretary of the school called upon the petitioners to explain as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against them for 'having agency of an insurance company', which was regarded as highly irregular. The petitioners were further asked to dissociate themselves from the agency and report compliance. In the explanation submitted, the...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Guttoffnungashutto Sterkrado
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-15-1992
Reported in: [1992]197ITR66(Orissa)
A. Pasayat, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ' the Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (in short, 'the Tribunal') for adjudication in both the cases :' Whether the Tribunal was justified in their opinion that the profit of the assessee's business can only be properly deduced yearwise from the method employed by the assessee by maintaining its accounts on complete work basis and by the method of dividing the net profit yearwise in proportion to yearly gross receipts ?'2. Both the references are governed by this judgment.3. The background facts as appear from the statement of case drawn up by the Tribunal are as follows :M/s. Guttoffnungashutto Sterkrado (hereinafter referred to as the 'assessee') is a non-resident company incorporated in West Germany. It entered into a contract with Hindusthan Steel Limited for delivery, supervision, asse...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »