Orissa Court October 2002 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Orissa State Financial Corpn.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Ori)171; 2003(I)OLR195
R.K. Patra, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 in which at the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, has referred the following question for opinion of this Court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct reading of Section 34 of the CPC r/w Section 31 of the Orissa State Financial Corporation Act, 1951, the Tribunal was legally correct in coming to the conclusion that no interest accrued to the assessee-corporation till the decision of the Civil Court and that no such interest amount would be chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee for the asst. yr. 1983-84 ?'2. The respondent-assessee is the Orissa State Financial Corporation established under Section 3(1) of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. The assessment year is 1983-84 for which the previous year ended on 31st March, 1983. During the relevant year, the assessee credited Rs. 1,14,82,064 to 'interest suspense account' instead of cred...
Banto Bhaskar Rao Vs. Purna Suna and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC625; 2004ACJ1411; (2003)ILLJ920Ori; 2003(I)OLR33
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a declaration that third proviso to Section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is ultra vires of the Constitution of India and for a further declaration that despite availability of an alternative statutory remedy under the Act the petitioner has a legal right to invoke the writ jurisdiction and for quashing the award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation at Annexure-3.2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a share cropper and earns his livelihood by taking on lease small parcels of land belonging to the different owners of his locality and by cultivating the same for specific season or periods. He had employed one Gadan Chhatria alias Suna on casual basis as and when the necessity arose for help in the matter of cultivation in respect of the land taken on lease. The term of employment was purely casual, intermittent and on daily basis. During the year 1989 th...
Cit Vs. Orissa State Financial Corpn.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-29-2002
Reported in: [2003]126TAXMAN157(Orissa)
ORDERR.K. Patra, J. This is a reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in which at the instance of the revenue, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, has referred the following question for opinion of this court :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct reading of section 34 of the Civil Procedure Code read with section 31 of the Orissa State Financial Corporation Act, 1951, the Tribunal was legally correct in coming to the conclusion that no interest accrued to the assessee-corporation till the decision of the civil court and that no such interest amount would be chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee for the assessment year 1983-84 ?'2. The respondent-assessee is the Orissa State Financial Corporation established under section 3(1) of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. The assessment year is 1983-84 for which the previous year ended on 31-3-1983. During the relevant year, the assessee credited Rs. 1,14,...
Maheswar Panda and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT703
P.K. Tripathy, J. 1. Though this case under Section 482, Cr. P.C. has been heard along with a batch of cases involving the offences under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short 'the Act') but keeping in view the distinguishable facts involved in this case the Criminal Misc. case is disposed of by this separate Judgment. 2. The two petitioners are accused nos. 8 and 9 in G.R.Case No. 132 of 1997 of the Court of Special Judge, Cuttack involving the offences under Sections 458, 342, 354, 380, 506/36 I.P.C. and Section 3 of the Act as per the impugned order of cognizance dated 20.8.1998. That G.R. case is pending in the court of Sessions Judge-cum-special Judge, Cuttack. As per the impugned order, upon receipt of the charge-sheet submitted by the Officer-in-charge, Baramba Police-station, learned Special Judge took cognizance of the aforesaid offences both under the Indian Penal Code and the Act. That order is challenged on the...
State Vs. Megha Tirkey
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT713
P. K. Tripathy, J. 1. In course of inspection of the Court of Add!. Sessions Judge, Rourkela by an Honourable Judge of this Court the case record of Sessions Trial No. 187/55 of 1995 was perused and it was noticed that though the accused/opposite party Megha Tirkey was arrested followed with submission of charge-sheet under Section 302, IPC but at the stage of consideration of charge trial Court instead of framing charge under Section 302, IPC framed charge for the offence under Section 304, IPC. The Hon'ble Inspecting Judge on perusal of the materials on record formed opinion that materials in the Case Diary was sufficient to frame charge for the offence under Section 302, IPC and therefore, the order of conviction against the accused for the offence under Section 304, IPC should be considered and if required, it be interfered with by exercising the revisional jurisdiction with a direction for trial of the case for the offence under Section 302, IPC. In that context, at the stage of a...
Pandaba Nayak Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT772; 2003(85)ECC770
P. K. Tripathy, J.1. Appellant challenges his conviction under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short 'the N.D.P.S. Act'). 2. Appellant was prosecuted for the offence under Section 15 of the N.D.P.S. Act on the allegation that on 6.2.1995 at about 8.30 P.M. the Sub-Inspector of Excise, Belpahar (P.W. 4) while on patrolling duty at Belpahar Railway Station - Bus stand area along with his staff he found the accused in possession of gunny bag (M.O. I). Because of the smell which was emitting from the article inside the gunny bag, P.W. 4 suspected that to be containing Narcotic substances and after intimating in writing about the intention to conduct search and whether appellant wanted his search in presence of a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate (Ext. 2) he got the consent in writing (Ext. 3) from the appellant for his search by P.W. 4. Thus, in presence of two independent witnesses of the locality (P.Ws. 1 and 2) and his Excise staff out of whom the...
Smt. Kunjalata Sahoo Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT752
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.2. In this application under Section 439(2), Cr.P.C. petitioner has prayed for cancellation of bail granted in favour of opposite party No. 2 by learned Sessions Judge, Balasore in Criminal Misc. Case No. 424 of 1997. She has prayed for cancellation of bail precisely on the three following grounds ; (i) Petitioner mislead the Court below that he was a student of Law by the date of consideration of the bail application though in fact he was not a student by then; (ii) His prayer for bail under Section 439, Cr.P.C. being rejected on merit on 27.8.1997 by the Sessions Judge in Criminal Misc. Case No. 406 of 1997 in the absence of any changed circumstances he could not have been allowed to go on bail by the self-same Sessions Judge as per the impugned order dt. 26.9.1997 in Criminal Misc. Case No. 424 of 1997; and (iii) Opposite party No. 2 is giving threatening to the petitioner. 3. Opposite party No. 2 is the accused in G. R. Case No. 516 of 1997 of the Court ...
Bhagyadhar Dash Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: III(2003)BC567; 95(2003)CLT656
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This revision is preferred against the order dated 7.12.2001 in I.C.C. Case No. 102 of 1998 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar. Petitioner is the accused in that case whereas opposite party No. 2 is the complainant and the impugned order is an order passed under Section 251, Cr.P.C. 2. In the said complaint case cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (in short, 'the Act') was taken and process was issued to the petitioner to stand the trial. Mr. D. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the complaint and the statement of the complainant do not satisfy the requirement of law for taking cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the Act inasmuch as the complainant did not satisfy the Court below about service of registered notice in accordance with Clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the Act, and therefore cause of action did not arise to take cognizance as per the provision in Section 142 of th...
Bishnu Charan Malla Vs. Sankarsan Mohapatra Alias Behera and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: 2003(I)OLR61
B.P. Das, J.1. This revision application is filed by defendant No. 12 in Title Suit No. 59 of 1978 pending before the Civil Judge (S.D), Kendrapara challenging the order passed by the Addl. District Judge,Kendrapara dismissing his Title Appeal No. 38 of 1992 and confirming the order of the trial Court rejecting the petition filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short the 'C.P.C.') for setting aside the ex parte order passed against him.2. The case of the petitioner is that opposite party No. 1 as the plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 59 of 1978 for partition along with a prayer to declare that the plaintiff and his adoptive mother- defendant No. 2 are not bound by the sale deeds dated 23.9.1974. 8.8.1977 and 4.7.1978 executed by Agani, i.e., the adoptive father of the present opposite party No. 1. Further case of the petitioner is that the petitioner himself and his brothers have purchased Ac 0.58 decimals of land by a registered sale deed dated 8.8.1977. According ...
Prasanna Kumar Sahoo Alias Banka and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR706
P.K. Tripathy, J. 1. In this application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. petitioners have prayed to quash the F.I.R. in Tigiria P.S, Case No. 109 of 2001, stated to be involving the offences punishable under Section 341/323/324/506/34, I.P.C. read withSection 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 1989, (in short the Act). This application Under Section 482 Cr. P.C. was heard along with a batch of cases involving the similar legal issues and has been disposed of by separate judgments in each of the cases. It be noted that, both the parties consented for disposal of this application Under Section 482. Cr. P.C. at the stage of admission.2. One of the legal issues which is involved in the batch of the cases, is whether investigation made by a police officer not appointed in accordance with Rule 7 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules. 1995. (in short, the Rules), read with Section 9 of the Act is valid to take cog...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »