Court : Orissa
Reported in : [1962]13STC412(Orissa)
R.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. The following question has been referred to this Court under Section 24(3) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, by the Member, Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, in pursuance of a direction given by this Court under Section 24(2) of that Act:-Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the appellant was not liable to pay tax on sales of goods supplied by the Textile Marketing Organization.2. The Government Haridloom Textile Marketing Organization is a concern run on a commercial basis by the Government of Orissa, with its headquarters at Cuttack. Its business is to sell handloom products produced at various centres in Orissa. The opposite party K.C. Mohapatra (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) is the proprietor of a shop known as Lakshmi House near Lion's Gate in Puri town. He carried on his own independent business of selling various kinds of textile goods and he was registered as a 'dealer' and used to pay sales tax in re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1962Ori202
ORDERS. Barman, J. 1. Sri Shanti Prasad Jain, an industrialist and financier,--who until lately was Chairman of the Board of Directors of Kalinga Tubes Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Company), is the petitioner in the complaint herein under Sections 397, 398, 402 and 403 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 on the ground of alleged continuing and continuous process of oppression to some part of the members of the Company (including the petitioner) and mis-management in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Company, arising out of group factions in the directorate of the Company, where the petitioner's rival groups are alleged to have acted with the ulterior motive of gaining voting power to obtain control of the Company for the said rival groups and their nominees to the exclusion of the petitioner, his group and his nominees, in the circumstances hereinafter stated. 2. The petitioner represents what is known as the Jain Group in the Company Respondent No. 1 is the Company; r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1963Ori54
Narasimham, C.J.1. These two appeals arise out of the judgment of the learned Second additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, decreeing with costs a suit brought by the respondent for recovery of damages from the Railway administration for non-delivery of certain goods that were booked from Surareddipalayam on the Southern Railway on 10-12-52. The defence of the Railway Administration was that the consignment was looted by a riotous mob at Bezwada Railway Station on 16-12-52 when, due to the death, by fasting, of the well known Andhra Leader Poti Sriramulu in Madras, in connection with the formation of a Andhra Province, there was an agitation and commotion in several parts of Andhra territory including Bezwada Railway Station. The Railway administration examined some of the members of its staff at Bezwada Railway Station, to show that the loss of the consignment took place at Bezwada Railway Station on 16-12-52. Thus D. W. 1 stated that the consignment in question was kept in wagon No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1963Ori68
G.K. Misra, J. 1. Defendants are the appellants against the reversing judgment of the learned District Judge of Cuttack decreeing the plaintiffs' claim for Rs. 680/10/- in each of the suits. Second appeal No. 240/60 and Second Appeal No. 241/60 correspond to money suit No. 198/56 and Money Suit No. 197/56 respectively. Facts alleged in both the cases are almost identical. In each case the facts are that the plaintiff booked a consignment of 220 bags of sugar weighing 605 mds.. (each bag weighing 2 maunds 30 seers). One consignment was under Invoice No. 2 R/R No. 124163 dated 5-6-55 and the other was under Invoice No. 3 R/R No. 124154 dated 5-6-55. These consignments were delivered on 18-7-55 though they were to reach Cuttack on 15-6-55. On enquiry the plaintiff came to know that the wagon containing the consignments was misdirected to Kantapukur Station on the Eastern Railway and was detained there for more than a month. The plaintiff suffered loss of Rs. 1512/8/- due to this extraordi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : [1963]14STC46(Orissa)
Narasimham, C.J.1. The points of law involved in these three applications are the same and hence they are dealt with in one judgment.2. Under-section 24(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, this Court directed the Member, Sales Tax Tribunal, to refer the following two questions of law :-(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in entering into the merits of the assessment while sitting in judgment over the orders of the first appellate authority rejecting first appeals summarily.(ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in holding that the notice in the instant case issued in the firm's name and served on one partner only after the dissolution of the partnership is illegal so as to vitiate the assessments made in pursuance of such notice.3. The relevant facts are as follows : The opposite party was a firm consisting of three partners, namely, R.K. Upadhyaya, B.C. Patnaik and S.K. Sen, dealing in motor car spare pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1964Ori149; 1964CriLJ685
Misra, J. 1. The appellant has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The prosecution case is that on November 7th 1960 the accused with his cousin (P. W. 1) was harvesting Kusala crop from a piece of land. The deceased protested stating that the crop had been grown by him and the accused was not entitled to remove the same. There were some altercations by exchange of words. All of a sudden the accused picked up a lathi and dealt blows on the head, neck and waist of the deceased, and the deceased fell on fire-woods which were burning there and met with instantaneous death. 2. The accused in his statement Under Section 342, Cri. P. C. admitted that he was cutting Kusala crop and that the deceased prohibited him from removing crops claiming the land to be his and that there was mutual exchange of words; but he denied to have assaulted the deceased with a stick. He stated that the deceased was drunk, he pushed him and the deceased fell ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1963Ori189
Misra, J.1. AHO. 13/61-- This appeal arises out of an application by Sri Shanti Prasad Jain under Sections 397, 398, 402 and 403 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter caned the Act). As there are large number of appeals and the descriptions of the parties as appellants and respondents may lead to confusion, the parties would be described in this judgment as petitioner and respondents in terms or the petition dated 14th September, 1960. The petitioners case is as follows :--(A) Kalinga Tubes Limited (hereinafter to be reterred to as the Company) is a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act having its registered office at Chod-war in Cuttack district. The petitioner is a holder of 3000 shares of the value of Rs. 100.0.0 each. Those shares are fully paid up and all calls due have been duly paid. The petitioner obtained consent in writing under Section 399 or the Act of the shareholders holding 13,083 shares. The holdings of the petitioner and of the consenting share-holders ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1963Ori171
Narasimham, C.J. 1. In these 2 applications under Article 226 the constitutional validity of Clause (kk) of Sub-section (1) of Section 131 of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950, as amended by the Orissa Municipal (Amendment) Act, 1954, is under challenge. Hence they were both heard together and will be disposed of in one judgment.2. Sub-section (1) of Section 131 of the Orissa Municipal Act confers power on the Municipalities in Orissa, to levy various kinds of taxes and fees after obtaining the sanction of the State Government. By the amending Act of 1954 a new Clause (kk) was inserted in that Section as follows :'(kk) An octroi on goods brought within the limits of the Municipality for consumption, use or sale therein is maintained by the Municipal Council, (sic.)'3. Mr. Das for the petitioners urged that the said Clause (kk) of Sub-section (1) of Section 131 is unconstitutional on the following two grounds :(i) It amounted to excessive delegation by the Legislature, inasmuch as the maxi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1964Ori224
G.K. Misra, J.1. Defendant is the appellant against the confirming judgment. Plaintiff's case is that the defendant executed a sale deed (Ex. 3) on 6-4-1951 for consideration. It was presented for registration on 4-3-51. Subsequently the defendant did not turn up before the Sub-registrar for registration. The Sub-Registrar refused to register on 14-9-1951. Plaintiffs filed an' application before the Registrar under Section 73 of the Indian Registration Act which was rejected on 30-4-1953 under Section 76 of the Registratian, Act. The plaintiffs accordingly filed the suit on 14-5-1953. The relief sought in the suit is not merely to get Ex. 3 registered. Further reliefs have been claimed for confirmation of possession and in the alternative for recovery of possession.2. The defence case is that the defendant is an illiterate lady who fixed her thumb impression and signature on a blank paper on the representation that it was a mortgage bond. She denied execution and passing of considerati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1965Ori114; 1965CriLJ54
R.K. Das, J. 1. This is a complainant's appeal against an order, dated 11-7-1963 passed by the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Bhubaneswar, acquitting the respondents of an offence under Section 411, Indian Penal Code.2. Accused Dayauidhi is the Manager and accused Ganesh is an employee of Messrs. Patnaik Industries (P.) Limited, Bhubaneswar. P. W. 1, Sudhakar Das, is the managing director of another concern known as Orissa Concretes Products Ltd., near about the above firm at Bhubaneswar. On 17-6-1961, P, W. 1 came to know that some high-tension steel wires had been stolen from their factory. On 16-6-1961 at about 8 in the morning, P. W. 1 went to the factory premises of Patnaik Industries and found one coil in their store which he identified as their coil. Accused Dayanidhi was then absent from the factory. So P. W. 1 went to his residence and informed him that one of their missing coils was found in the premises of Patnaik Industries. Dayanidhi felt surprised and promised to look into th...
Tag this Judgment!