Orissa Court November 1994 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.
Suchitra Chhotrya Vs. Prajeev Kumar Chhotary and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR377
A. Pasayat. J.1. Challenge in this application is to the order dated 20-9-1991, passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in Civil Proceeding No. 173 of 1984, refusing prayer of the present petitioner to advance the date and to pass an order relating to custody of the child. Learned Judge, Family Court did not accept the prayer to advance the date, because originally the case was posted to 23-11-1994 with the following reasons and observations:'The mother of the child is present today. She says that the child was under her and her husband's custody in Bombay in May until 12th June, 1994. Now the child is not with her mother. Due to disputes the young couple are living separately. The lady is Arts Graduate from Utkal University of 1986, and her husband is a graduate and now working as Regional Sales Manager, Ramington, Cuttack. The petition of the lady opp. party filed today lor advancing the case and to pass necessary orders is of not so urgent in nature in view of multiplicity of...
Bhakua Kampa and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: 1996CriLJ350
S.K. Mohanty, J.1. Bhakua (appellant No. 1), Brahma (appellant No. 2), Suguda (informant) and Parama (deceased) are brothers. They lived separately. Makaranda (appellant No. 3) and Bhaskar (appellant No. 4) are sons of Bhakua. The appellants assail their conviction for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 14 I.P.C. for having committed murder of Parama in furtherance of their common intention. Each of them has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the aforesaid offence.2. Prosecution story in brief is that on 12-7-86 at about 3 P. M. the four appellants cut the embankment of the water reservoir at different places, as a result of which the water of the reservoir passed on to the adjoining field of Parama and thereby damaged small paddy plants thereon. Parama arrived there and protested. The appellants did not pay any heed and on the other hand threatened Parama with assault. Sumali (P.W.1) the daughter of Parama arrived there and pleaded with the appellants not...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Electrochem Orissa Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: (1995)123CTR(Ori)162; [1995]211ITR552(Orissa)
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. The Tribunal has drawn up the statement of case on being directed by this court on an application being filed under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), to refer the following question for the opinion of the court :'Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the interest earned by Messrs. Electrochem Orissa Ltd. to the tune of Rs. 50,960 from short-term deposits for the assessment year 1979-80 should not be treated as income earned by the assessee under the head 'Income from other sources' ?'2. The assessee, a company, was engaged in the business of manufacture of manganese dioxide, ferro-manganese and other allied products. The relevant assessment year is 1979-80. During the previous year, the factory of the assessee was being constructed and the assessee had deposited some money in fixed deposit and had earned interest to the tune of Rs. 30,960. The assessee claimed that the interest earned by ...
NimaIn Charan Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-08-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Ori106
V.A. Mohta, C.J.1. Nimain Charan Mohanty is the Chairman of Oondia Pancha-yat Samiti in the district of Dhenkanal. Election had taken place on 14-7-1992 in terms of Section 16(3) of the Orissa Panchayat Samiti Act, 1959 (the Act). Sometime in early August, 1994, 15 members of the Panchayat Samiti had sent to the Sub-Collector, Dhenkanal, a requisition petition to convene a special meeting of the Samiti for consideration of a no-confidence motion against theChairman. Vide order dated 28-8-1994, the said requisition petition was rejected and hence not acted upon on the ground that the petition was not in order in terms of clause (a) of Sub-section (2) of Section 46-B of the Act, which provider for signature of atleast 1/3rd of the members with a right to vote. Consequently, no special meeting was, in fact, convened. On 25-10-1994, a second requisition for the same purpose, signed by 30 members, was given, pursuant to which a special meeting, as contemplated by Section 46-B, has been conv...
Dulari Devi and ors. Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-08-1994
Reported in: (1995)124CTR(Ori)398; [1995]211ITR524(Orissa)
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. On an application being filed under Sub-section (3) of Section 64 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), by the persons held to be accountable, after their application under Sub-section (1) thereof was rejected by the Appellate Tribunal, the High Court directed the Tribunal to draw up a statement of case and refer the following question of law : 'Whether the Tribunal is correct in distinguishing the decision reported in Gurupad Khandappa Magdum v. Hirabai Khandappa Magdum : [1981]129ITR440(SC) to hold that the property of the deceased passed to the assessee was not inherited by them ?' 2. The question thus posed has not properly been framed, and accordingly, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we reframe the question as follows : 'Whether the Tribunal was right in distinguishing the decision reported in Gurupad Khandappa Magdum v. Hirabai Khandappa Magdum : [1981]129ITR440(SC) , in arriving at the conclusion that on the death...
Jagannath Sales Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-08-1994
Reported in: [1995]211ITR431(Orissa)
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. The assessee having moved this court under Sub-section (2) of Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and this court on being satisfied that a question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal formulated the following question for opinion of this court : 'Whether the Tribunal was justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 65,000 in the shortage account ?' and called upon the Tribunal to draw up a statement of facts and accordingly the Tribunal has made a statement to this court. 2. The petitioner, a partnership-firm, carried on the business of supply of moong dhal in the district of Sundargarh. When the Government of Orissa in the Community Development Department invited tenders for supply of moong dhal to some districts in the State, the petitioner offered to supply the same to the Collectors of Sambalpur and Sundargarh districts and his offer having been accepted, the petitioner supplied the same. To ensure the supply, the petitioner purchased moong dhal f...
Fanibhusan Behera, Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-07-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1561; 1995(I)OLR151
A. Pasayat, J. 1. 'Rape or Raptus is when a man has carnal knowledge of a woman by force and against her will'' (Co. Litt. 123 b); or, as expressed more fully, 'rape is the carnal knowledge of any woman above the age of ten years, against her will; or of a woman child, under that age, with or against her will' (Hale P. C. 628). In India, as set out in Clause Five of Section 375 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC') the age relating to consent is sixteen years, at present. Original age of ten has been substituted from time to time in 1891 and 1925 by twelve years, and fourteen years. Since 1943 it is sixteen years. The essential words in an indictment for rape are rapuit and carna-liter cognovit. Rape is no longer considered as sexual assault by a man on the victim. Its scar on account of physical action may be obliterated; but it lives in an indolent state of mind of the victim which is never healed. Here the victim whose name we do not propose to indicate, has suffered ignomity...
Laxmi Narayana Das Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-07-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2579
K.L. Issrani, J.1. The present revision petition arises out of the conviction of the petitioner under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act for having contravened Clause 3 of the Orissa Rice and Paddy Control Order, 1965 (herein-after called, 'the Order').2. According to the prosecution, the godown of the accused-petitioner at Chitrakonda was searched on 9-2-1991 and 36 quintals of rice were found to have been stored in that godown. Since the accused had got no licence or authority to store such quantity of rice, the same was seized by the Assistant Civil Supplies Officer, Malkangiri. It was alleged that during the seizure, the accused-petitioner produced one cash memo showing purchase of five bags of rice weighing five quintals and also gave a statement.3. The plea of the defence was that he kept the seized rice for his own consumption and for the consumption of his labourers as he was a contractor in the Block. No evidence has been adduced by the accused-petitioner.4. ...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sudarsan Samal and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-01-1994
Reported in: (1996)IIILLJ1075Ori
D.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. The New India Assurance Company Ltd. filed this appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') challenging the judgment of the Joint Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner for workmen's Compensation, Bhubaneswar in W.C. Case No. 38 of 1991 awarding compensation of Rs. 1,03,990/- to respondent No. 1 and directing the appellant to pay the entire amount.2. The factual backdrop of the case relevant for disposal of the appeal may be stated thus:Sudarsan Samel respondent No. 1 was employed as driver of the tipper-truck bearing registration No. OSD 250 owned by respondent No. 2M/s. B. Engineers and Builders and insured by the appellant. On July 24, 1989 when the respondent No. l was driving the vehicle, he met with an accident in which he was seriously injured. He was treated initially at Kenduguda Public Health Centre and when his condition deteriorated he was shifted to M.K.C.G. Medical College Hospital, Berhampur. He remained as an...
Budhadev Panda Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-01-1994
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR148
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioner has prayed for a direction to the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Narasinghpur (in short 'JMFC') to commit G.R. Case No. 10. of 1993 to the Court of Session, Cuttack to be tried as counter-case to S.T. Case No. 375 of 1993 pending before learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack. 2. Background facts as portrayed by petitioner to support the prayer in essence are as follows:Petitioner and six others are arraigned in G.R. Case No. 10 of 1993 pending in Court of learned JMFC, Narasinghpur, for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 148 and 323, 325, 294, 452 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC'). Charge-sheet has been submitted after investigation and learned JMFC has taken cognizance of aforesaid offences. The said G.R. case corresponds to Kanpur P.S. Case No. 4 of 1993. Another case i.e. Kanpur P.S. Case No. 3 of 1993 corresponding to G. R. Case No. 9 of 1993 was instituted for commissi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›