Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1965]16STC62(Mad)
..... that difference of opinion. but that case was undoubtedly a case of inter-state sale as the contract admittedly involved the movement of the goods from calcutta (west bengal) to the state of bihar. even though the question as to what is meant by a sale in the course of import did not directly arise, venkatarama aiyar, j., while examining the legal ..... of 1947 with regard to sales prior to the central sales tax act of 1956. the supreme court held that the initial purchase of goods by the dealer inside the orissa state, though for the express purpose of being sold and despatched to dealers outside the state could not be regarded as purchase in the course of inter-state trade in ..... and 5 of the act the parliament has accepted the tests and principles laid down in the earlier decisions of the supreme court:in endupuri narasimham & son v. stale of orissa and ors. [1961] 12 s.t.c. 282, it was held in the case of sales covered by article 286(1)(b) that only sale or purchase of goods which .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1966Cal552,70CWN82
..... based: vide t.c. basappa v. t. nagappa : [1955]1scr250 , nor should the court attempt to appreciate the evidence on which the tribunal acted: vide state of orissa v. murlidhar jena, air 1963 sc 404, and indian iron and steel co. ltd. v. their workmen, air 1958 sc 130. the records of the appellant's case ..... obtained an appointment as manager and director-in-charge of leonard biermans, a company incorporated in belgium and carrying on business as manufacturers of playing cards in west bengal and having its principal place of business in calcutta. this company requested the government of india to allow the appellant to remain in india, and on such request ..... state are required to be taken in the name of the governor. the order of the governor has been authenticated by the deputy secretary to the state of west bengal and such authentication is substantial compliance with the requirement of article 166(1) of the constitution: vide state of bombay v. purushottam. : 1952crilj1269 34. the learned .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1676; 1966CriLJ1347; [1966]3SCR373
..... .5 per cent. 11. a.11.01.02. buffalo milk shall contain not less than 5.0 per cent. of milk fat except in delhi, punjab, pepsu, uttar pradesh, bihar, west bengal, assam, bombay and saurashtra where it shall not be less than 6 per cent. the milk solids other than milk fat shall not be less than 9 per cent. 12 ..... free whether such secretion has been processed or not. 10. a.11.01.01. cow milk shall contain not less than 3.5 per cent of milk fat, except in orissa, where it shall be not less than 3 per cent. and in punjab and pepsu where it shall be not less than 4.0 per cent. the milk solids other .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC212; 1967CriLJ265; [1966]3SCR830
..... imperial coronation darbar held in delhi in december, 1911, the king announced a new distribution of territory. bihar and orissa were cut off from bengal and were formed into an independent lt. governorship. eastern bengal was reunited with west bengal and assam once again became a separate province with a chief commissioner. this new scheme took effect from ..... governor-general in council by notification delegated to the chief commissioner of assam powers which were formerly vested in or were exercisable by the lt. governor of bengal. on june 13, 1874 the governor-general in council made alterations in the rules of 1872 but only to make them accord with the political changes ..... 17 & 18 vict., ch. 77. by the proclamation he took under his immediate authority and management the backward territories then under the lt. governor of bengal including the naga hills. by another notification the governor-general in council in exercise of powers under s. 3 of the act formed those territories into a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1967Cal338,[1966]18STC379(Cal)
..... buyer. 56. secondly, the decisions relied upon by dr. pal overlook the observations of venkaterama ayyar j., in the leading decision of the supreme court in bengal immunity co. ltd. v. state of bihar, : [1955]2scr603 , where his lordship explained both the provisions in the sale of goods act and the explanation to article 286(1)(a) and ..... and delivery to the common carrier is not 'actual delivery' , and that, in this case, the goods were actually delivered not in bengal when they were delivered to the common carrier but in bihar when they were delivered to the purchaser.' 57. thirdly, the view taken in the above observations of venkatarama ayyar j., has been followed by ..... to another under the contract of sale'. this view was not only reiterated by venkatarama ayyar j., in the later case of endupuri narasimham and son v. state of orissa, : [1962]1scr314 , but it was pointed out there that the principle or the test in this behalf was the same for the purpose of ascertaining whether a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC898; [1967]1SCR643
..... 1961. this showed that the 'hut' was a reserved symbol of the praja socialist party in andhra pradesh, assam, bihar, gujarat, kerala, uttar pradesh, madras, maharashtra, mysore, orissa, madhya pradesh, west bengal and the union territories of delhi, himachal pradesh and manipur. in the punjab, rajasthan and the union territory of tripura, ..... the praja socialist party enjoyed the 'hut' as an allotted free symbol. the socialist party had the 'tree' as the reserved symbol in andhra pradesh, bihar, madhya pradesh ..... september 22, 1962 and this time the 'hut' was shown as the reserved symbol of the praja socialist party in assam, bihar, gujarat, kerala, madhya pradesh, maharashtra, mysore, orissa and uttar pradesh. the socialist party enjoyed the 'tree' as the reserved symbol in madhya pradesh and the union territory of manipur .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1967CriLJ1423
..... consent of the state government concerned, hereby entrusts to the government of each of the states of andhra pradesh, assam, bihar, jammu and kashmir, kerala, gujarat, maharastra, madhya pradesh, madras mysote, orissa. punjab, rajasthan, uttar pradesh, west bengal and nagaland, the functions of the central government under clause (g) of sub-section (2) of section 3, and ..... order. 1962 as it was before the amendment of 1965. under the delegation made by the central government by the notification of december 31,1964 the orissa state government cannot be said to have acquired the new power of the central government which it acquired by virtue of the subsequent amendment in 1965 by which ..... ? in other words, the point is whether or not the pre-amendment delegation by the central govern-merit in favour of the state entrusted to the orissa state government the authority only to the extent which the central government itself bad at the point of time when the delegation was made. it is fundamental .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1969All278
..... in dispute and was the subject of a pending adjudication in legally valid proceedings under section 4 (h) of the bihar land reforms act.41. another case relied upon on behalf of the state was state of orissa v. ram chandra, air 1964 sc g85, where it was held: 'mere possession of the property for however long ..... , possess, or part with property which is all that article 19(1)(f) of the constitution protects according to the view of patanjali sastri, c. j., in state of west bengal v. subodh gopal : [1954]1scr587 . a broader view of the term 'property' was taken by the supreme court in commr., hindu religious endowments v. l. t. swamiar ..... what patanjali sastri, c. j., had, in subodh copal's case : [1954]1scr587 (supra), described as 'concrete' rights in particular properties. in auanda behra v. state of orissa : [1955]2scr919 , the supreme court held that a 'profit a preu-dre' was immovable property and countenanced the possibility that a contract may constitute 'property' covered by articles .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 1968CriLJ1074
..... appearing on behalf of the state. in that case enquiry was held under the disciplinary proceedings (administrative tribunal) rules. these rules were more drastic than the bihar and orissa subordinate services discipline and appeal rules (1935). it was held in that case as under:if against two public servants similarly circumstanced enquiries may be directed according ..... classify offences to which the west bengal special courts act would apply. it has been observed in that ruling:the act itself lays down a procedure which is less advantageous to the accused than the ..... it does not treat differently the government servants similarly situate. the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a ruling of the supreme court in state of west bengal v. anwar ali sarkar : 1952crilj510 . this ruling is by no means helpful to him inasmuch as in that case no attempt was made to particularize and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1969All43
..... in my opinion, a little besides the point. 7. the golden rule of construction established since the ages was reiterated by s. r. dass, j. in bengal immunity co. v. state of bihar : [1955]2scr603 . this rule of construction was first propounded by lord coke in heydon's case, (1584) 3 co rep 7a (v). in 1898 lindley ..... known that the legislature can enact a positive independent provision in the form of a proviso, see ishverlal thakorelal almaula v. motibhai nagjibhai : [1966]1scr367 and state of orissa v. debaki debi : [1964]5scr253 . the submission for the state that the thekedari abolition act, even though it may violate the second proviso, would nonetheless be valid ..... kameshwar singh v. state of bihar, air 1951 pat 91 (sb). the plea that it violated article 31(2) failed, but the attack under article 14 succeeded. the patna high court delivered the judgment on march 12, 1951. at that time land reforms acts of several states including uttar pradesh, orissa and madhya pradesh were under .....
Tag this Judgment!