Orissa Court July 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.
Miss Reeta Vs. Berhampur University and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-17-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Ori27
Hansaria, C.J.1. The point for decision in these references is about the applicability of the principle of promissory estoppel debarring the Universities to declare that the petitioners had failed in the examinations in question, after having declared them to have passed.2. To understand the scope of reference, we have to find out why the references were made and what was the point of reference. The first referring order is dated 27-11-1990 and was passed in O. J. C. No. 3345 of 1988. We shall presently note the facts of that case, but the reference was made because the Bench hearing that case felt the necessity of having a 'second look on the question as to whether, when a mistake of the present nature is detected within a short period and the only step which the concerned person has taken is either to apply for higher study or for job, estoppel would stand in the way', A need for second look was felt because the petitioner in support of his submission pressed into service a Bench dec...
Bansidhar SwaIn Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-17-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ838; 1992(II)OLR206
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. Aggrieved by the order dated 22-6-1990 of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Anandapur, taking cognizance : an offence Under Section 409 I PC, the petitioner has approached this Court invoking the inherent power of the Court Under Section 482 Cr. P. C.2. The Executive Engineer, Anandapur Barage Division, lodged an information with the Officer-in-charge, So Police Station in the district of Keonjhar alleging that the present petitioner while working as the Assistant Engineer at the relevant time along with another Executive Engineer and Junior Engineer committed an offence of criminal breach of trust in respect of different amounts mentioned in the FIR dated 19-3-1989.The FIR discloses that an amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- was allotted to Anandapur Barage Division, Bidyadharpur for utilising the fund for the purpose of the work in the said division during 1987-88. The Executive Engineer in his FIR pointed out that the petitioner in his capacity as an Assistant Engine...
Lalita Nandi Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-16-1992
Reported in: I(1994)DMC288
L. Rath, J.Charge having been framed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Cuttack, against the petitioner under Sections 498 and 306 IPC, she has approached this Court for quashing of the same. The petitioner is the sister-in-law of the deceased lady Pramila. Pramila had been married five to seven years back prior to 25-6-1986 on which date the committed suicide taking poison. The facts leading to the incident as alleged by the prosecution are that when all male members of the house were away and only Pramila and the petitioner were present, they picked up quarrel over a comb with the petitioner alleging Pramila as a thief and to have stolen the comb whereas Pramila claimed the comb to be her own and the petitioner to have removed it earlier. During the quarrel the mother-in-law of the deceased, Kausalya arrived and persuaded them not to quarrel. Pramila refused to take food and took the same after much persuasion. Both Pramila and the petitioner ceased to talk to each other. Pramila went ...
Binod Behari Panda Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-16-1992
Reported in: 1993(42)ECC78
G.B. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner assails the orders passed by the authorities under the Gold Control Act, 1968, directing confiscation of the gold recovered from the petitioner's premises and levying penalty on the petitioner.2. The brief facts are that the Central Excise staff searched the residential premises of the petitioner on 2.4.1976 and seized gold ornaments which according to the petitioner belong to the family and part, of it had been pawned with the petitioner by different persons. According to the excise authorities the seized articles consist of both primary gold weighing 1,210.848 grams and gold ornaments pledged with the petitioner by different persons weighing 12,825.806 grams. Apart from this 1,648.870 grams of gold ornaments belonging to the family of the petitioner were also recovered. The Central Excise authorities on being satisfied that the petitioner failed to produce any evidence and contravened Section 8 of the Gold (Control) Act, initiated a proceeding callin...
U.K. Ghosh Vs. Voltas Ltd. and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1992
Reported in: AIR1994Ori131
ORDERS.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Order in a high valuation suit and counter-claim tried at Talcher is impugned in this Civil Revision. Earlier this Court had fixed time for disposal of the suit which could not be materialised because counterclaim could not be made ready as stated before me. In such circumstances, trial court gave importance for hearing of the suit expedi-tiously. After witnesses for plaintiff were examined, on 6th July, 1992, D. W. I was examined in-chief on behalf of the defendant. He is the Chief Commercial Manager, a high officer of defendant Company. On 7th, this witness was cross-examined at length covering almost the entire day, as reported to me. After completion of cross-examination, his evidence was closed and defendant was to examine further witnesses next day. An application was filed on the 8th stating thatP.W. 1 may be recalled for further cross-examination as some questions could not be put being left out though they are material both for the purpose of the suit...
Arjuna Pradhan Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1992
Reported in: 1992CriLJ3614
A. Pasayat, J.1. In this appeal from Dhenkanal district jail Arjuna Pradhan (here-inafter referred to as the 'accused') calls in question the legality of his conviction under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860 (in short, the 'I.P.C.') and sentence of imprisonment for life as awarded by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal. The accused faced trial on the accusation that he killed his mother Jamuna Pradhan (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') on 17-4-86.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that the two brothers namely Khageswar Pradhan and Bisha Pradhan (P.Ws. 1 and 3 respectively) are sons of one Babu Pradhan. All of them lived in the same premises though Khageswar and Bisha lived separately from their father after partition. On the date of occurrence after taking the night meal, Khageswar slept on the verandah while his wife Kadila (P. W. 2) and his son slept in the house. Babu and the deceased slept on the same verandah intervened by a wall. The accused slept on the court-ya...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. B.N. Agarwala and Co.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-13-1992
Reported in: [1993]200ITR246(Orissa)
A. Pasayat, J. 1. Since both the cases involve an identical dispute, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Heard Mr. R. P. Kar for the Department and Mr. S. Ray for the assessee. On being moved by the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act'), this court had directed the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (in short, 'the Tribunal'), to state a case and refer the following question for our opinion:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, interest awarded by an arbitrator is income to be assessed to tax under the Act ?'3. The dispute relates to the taxability of interest received by an assessee in relation to an arbitration award. Taxability of such interest came up for consideration of this court in several cases. In Govinda Choudhury and Sons v. CIT : [1977]109ITR497(Orissa) , this court held such interest to be of capital nature and, therefore, not taxable as a revenue receipt. We are in agreement wi...
Golak Chandra Nayak and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-13-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT449; 1993CriLJ274; 1992(II)OLR201
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. The only question raised in this revision is whether the High Court in' exercise of its revisional as well as the inherent power can direct the lower Court to compound an offence not permissible Under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code).2. Prosecution case is, deceased Pranakrushna Panda had purchased a piece of land from the petitioners situated near his Bari side and the deceased had put a fence on the boundary Vine. On 3-6- 1987 at about 8 p. m., hearing petitioner Golak removing the fence put by the deceased, the latter reached the spot and protested. There was an altercation. Thereafter, petitioner Golak dealt a blow with a spade on the head of deceased Pranakrushna causing a bleeding injury. Pranakrushna was removed to the hospital in an unconscious state and was treated as an indoor patient, but died on 24-6-1987. The petitioners faced trial for the offence punishable Under Section 326 I.P.C. and nine p. ws. were examined from th...
Kedar Behera and ors. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-13-1992
Reported in: 75(1993)CLT753; 1992CriLJ378
A. Pasayat, J. 1. The four appellants (hereinafter described as the 'accused') question legality of the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur.2. Filtering out unnecessary details, the background as depicted by the prosecution is as follows: On 7-7-1984 in the afternoon, the accused came in two cycles to the entrance of Rampa' Sahi, Aska Road and parked their cycles near! the betel shop of one Bhobani Swain. At that time accused Hrudaya Parida, Subhas Behera and Kedar Behera were armed with a Kati (sharp cutting weapon) each and accused Nirmal Pal was armed with an iron rod. Standing near the betal shop, three of the accused persons asked Hrudaya to go to the house of Laxmi Charan Mohanty (hereinafter described as the 'deceased'), call him and attack him as soon as be comes out of his house, and they would join with him after the attack is given. Accused Hrudaya proceeded up to the house of the deceased and standing in front of his h...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Taratarini Motor Service
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-08-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR1029(Orissa)
1. Heard learned standing counsel for the Income-tax Department and Mr. Misra, learned counsel for the assessee.2. On being moved by an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act'), this court directed the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cutlack (in short, ' the Tribunal'), to state a case and refer the following question for opinion :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, payment of interest to a partner would not be available for deduction under Section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act ?'3. Pursuant to the direction, the Tribunal has stated a case.4. The fact situation as evident from the statement of case drawn up by the Tribunal is as follows :5. M/s. Taratarini Motor Service (hereinafter referred to as ' the assessee ' ) is a partnership firm. It filed a return for the assessment year 1978-79 disclosing income of Rs. 91,170. The Assessing Officer determined the income at Rs. 1,65,760. Computation was done in the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »