Orissa Court July 2000 Judgments
Smt. Epari Amaravati Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-31-2000
Reported in: [2000]246ITR108(Orissa)
1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The Commissioner of Income-tax on the basis of a declaration made by the petitioner under Section 80 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, has determined a sum of Rs. 75,000 under Section 90(1) of the aforesaid Act towards the full and final settlement of her tax arrear covered by the said declaration under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998. The determination as made by the Commissioner is as follows :Sl. No.Direct tax enactmentAssessment yearTax arrearAmount payable1.Income-tax1993-94Tax:Rs. NilRs. 75.000 Interest:Rs. 1,50,000 Penalty:Rs. Nil 3. The petitioner assails the validity of the said determination on the ground, inter alia, that it is contrary to Section 88 occurring in Chapter IV (Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998.4. Pursuant to our order dated June 30, 2000, standing counsel for the Department has filed two separate charts showing adjustment of payments against arrear dues as per the petitioner and that of th...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Epari Amaravati Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-31-2000
Reported in: [2001]246ITR108(Orissa)
Heard counsel for the parties,2. The Commissioner on the basis of a declaration made by the petitioner under section 88 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, has determined a sum of Rs. 75,000 under section 90(1) of the aforesaid Act towards the full and final settlement of her tax arrear covered by the said declaration under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998. The determination as made by the Commissioner is as follows :SI. No.Direct tax enactmentAssessment yearTax arrearAmount payable1.Income-tax1993-94Tax : Rs. NilRs. 75,000 Interest : Rs. 1,50,000 Penalty : Rs. Nil The petitioner assails the validity of the said determination on the ground, inter alia, that it is contrary to section 88 occurring in Chapter IV (Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998.Pursuant to our order dated 30-6-2000, standing counsel for the, department has filed two separate charts showing adjustment of payments against arrear dues as per the petitioner and that of the department. On a p...
Tag this Judgment!Dharmendra Singh and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-31-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ439
ORDERC.R. Pal, J.1. In this petition under Section 402, Cr.P.C. the petitioners have prayed to quash the order dated 29-3-1997 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Talcher in G.R. Case No. 361 of 1993 taking cognizance of the offences under Section 498A, I.P.C. and under Section 4 of the D.P. Act.2. The facts of the case are as follows :-The opposite party No. 2 namely, Smt. Jashomati Kour was given in marriage to one Raju alias Rajendra alias Harbindar Singh in the year 1991 according to Sikh customs and rites and after their marriage they lived happily for about a year. It is alleged that thereafter the parents and brother of Harbindar demanded a cash of Rs. 40,000/- and a Hero Honda motor cycle as dowry. When she expressed the inability of her father to meet the demand of the family members of her husband, they illtreated her and drove her out from their house on 30-4-1992 while she was carrying two months. Having been driven away from her matrimonial home she took shelter in her father'...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Chitta Ranjan Mishra Vs. Utkal University and Another
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-28-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Ori17; 91(2001)CLT42
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. The petitioner, who appeared at the M.Com. Part-I Examination, 1997 as a Non-Collegiate Candidate under the Utkal University, has approached this Court for a writ of mandamus and/or an appropriate direction to the University for re-evaluation of the answer papers in Papers-Ill and IV. 2. The petitioner's case, in short, is that he was a brilliant student throughout and he had passed all examinations beginning from H.S C. till B.Com. (Hons.) in 1st Class. However, he appeared as a Non-Collegiate candidate in M.Com. Patt-I Examination, 1997 under Utkal University bearing Roll No. 219V06970037 at the Commerce Department of the Utkal University Centre. The M.Com. Part-I examination consists of four papers each carrying 100 marks and he did very well in all the papers and was expecting to secure more than 60% of the marks in aggregate out of 400 marks. But the result, which was published in the month of April, 1998 revealed that he secured less than 50% of marks which sh...
Tag this Judgment!Makardhwaja Patra Vs. Akrura Suna
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-27-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT636
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. The decree-holder is the petitioner before this Court against the older passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sonepur, confirmed in appeal by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sonepur, arising out of an application under section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. The petitioner before this Court had executed a lease deed in favour of the opposite party in respect of about one acre of land for Dalua cultivation in the year 1994 on the condition that the opposite party would pay 7 bags of paddy to the petitioner. Due to non-payment of the said paddy the petitioner filed M. S. No. 1 of 1994 and the said suit was decreed. For realisation of the decretal amount, the present Execution Case was levied. In the Execution Case the opposite party filed an application under section 47, C. P. C. stating that the decree is inexecutable in view of the fact that the suit was barred under section 67 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (for short 'the O. L...
Tag this Judgment!Central Ware Housing Corporation Vs. K. Dandasi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-27-2000
Reported in: 90(2000)CLT533; 2000(II)OLR264
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This revision has been filed against the order dated 2.8.1996 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior for Division), Berhampur in Execution Proceeding No. 1 of 1995.2. As it appears from the order-sheet, notice on admission has not been issued and pursuant to notice in the limitation matter the opposite parties 1 to 3 have entered appearance. An application Under Section 50(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') has been filed to accord leave to prosecute this revision and no orders have been passed on the said application. Since the opposite parties 1 to 3 are represented by their Advocates and opposite party No. 4 is represented by the learned counsel for the State, on consent of parties the revision is taken up for hearing.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri S.S. Rao submitted that at the request of the petitioner Land Acquisition Officer, Ganjam, at Chatrapur (opposite party No. 4) issued notification Under Section 4(1) and 17(4) of the Act on...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mitradatta Mishra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-26-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ113; AIR2000Ori184
R.K. Patra, J. 1. The aforesaid two appeals filed at the instance of the insurance company are directed against the common judgment dated 6-10-1993 passed in Misc, Case Nos. 637 and 640 of 1990 by the 3rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Puri (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'). Both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Respondent No, 2 is the elder sister of respondent No. 1. Both of them through their maternal grandfather filed Misc. Case Nos. 637 of 1990 and 640 of 1990 claiming compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/- for the death of their father and Rs. 2,00,000/- for the death of their mother. The Tribunal by the Impugned order granted compensation of Rs. 9,00,000/- in the first case and Rs. 1,20,000/- in the second case.On 12-5-1990 at about 4 p.m. while Dr. Narasingh Mishra and Smt. Renubala Mishra, the parents of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, were going in a scooter, a Mini Truck bearing registration number ORX 4370 came from behind an...
Tag this Judgment!Poddar Machinery House Vs. Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR382; [2000]120STC585(Orissa)
R.K. Patra, J. 1. Basing on the maxim 'Nemo debet esse judex in propria sua causa' (no man can be a judge in his own cause), the petitioner in this application Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeks to assail the validity of the order made by the Accounts Member, Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal, Cuttack at annexure 2.2. The relevant facts leading to filing of this application may be briefly indicated :The petitioner was originally assessed Under Section 12(4) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act') for the year 1982-83. Later, basing on a fraud report submitted by the Inspector of Sales Tax, the Sales Tax Officer started proceeding Under Section 12(8) of the Act and by order dated December 9, 1983, enhanced the returned turnover by ten per cent which resulted in extra tax demand and imposition of penalty and extra tax demand under the Orissa Additional Sales Tax Act, 1975. Against the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed first appeals...
Tag this Judgment!Orissa Minerals Development Company Ltd., Through Its General Manager ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR306
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. On the basis of oral prayer of the counsel for the petitioner, the Sub-Collector, Champua, is impleaded as opposite party No. 2 in all the writ applications. In all these matters similar facts as in OJC No. 4741 of 1999 are involved and similar questions are raised. Therefore, all the writ applications are taken up together and the present order shall govern all the cases.2. It appears that a suo motu case was initiated under Regulation 2 of 1956 on the allegation that the present petitioner has remained in unauthorised occupation of land belonging to a member of the Scheduled Tribe. The present petitioner has filed show cause raising several contentions under Annexure-2. The Sub-Collector, Champua, passed an order directing restoration of the disputed land. Thereafter the present petitioner filed appeal wherein the appellate forum after noticing the contentions of both the parties has rejected the appeal on the ground that the appeal was barred by limitation.3. N...
Tag this Judgment!Rabindra Bastia Vs. Commissioner, Land Records and Settlement and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-25-2000
Reported in: 90(2000)CLT468; 2000(II)OLR440
P.K. Misra, J.1. The writ application is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner, Land Records and Settlement, allowing the revision of the present opposite parties to 2 to 7.2. Though several contentions have been raised, it is unnecessary to deal with them as in view of the defective procedure adopted by the Commissioner, the impugned order is required to be set aside and the matter is to be remanded for fresh disposal.3. It appears that the revision petition was filed after the prescribed period of limitation. On 21.2.1998 in the first order, the Commissioner directed 'Issue notice to opposite parties fixing 11.3.1998 for hearing on admission and merit'. On 11.3.1998 it appears that the Commissioner admitted the revision petition and heard counsels for the parties and passed the following order :'The O.P. 2 was said to be dead and Was deleted. Her legal heir, O.P.1 is already on record. The other O. Ps. were absent on calls and were set ex parte.The delay was condoned....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »