Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori52
Jagannadhadas, J. 1. These two applications raise almost identical questions for consideration & are accordingly deals with by this common judgment. The petitioner in cri. Misc. case No. 36/51 is one Ratanlal Gupta & in Cri. Misc. No. 37/51 is one Aska Ram Somani. 2. These two petitioners were arrested at about 3 A. m. early morning of 16-3-51 at Berham-pur. This arrest was consequent upon investigation which followed a report received by the Sub-Inspector of Govt. Railway Police from the Sub Inapector, Town Police. The petitioners were produced on the 16th itself before the Sub Divisional Magistrate under police custody with a forwarding report that they were found smuggling 1467 yards of cloth from Berhampur at the railway station & are believed to have committed an offence under Section 7 of Act XXIV [24] of 1946. They were remanded to custody till 28-3-51. Meanwhile on 17-3-61 the petitioners moved for bail. This was opposed on the ground that the offence was presumed to relate the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori116
Ray, C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's Second Appeal in a suit for recovery of Mustajarj rent. According to the plaintiff, the defendants took a Mustajari lease for collecting rents from the tenantsfor the Fasli 1353 and agreed to pay a certain sum, namely, Rs. 14/3/12/11. They have not respected the contract. Hence the suit. 2. The defence is that there was no such lease nor did they make any collections. On the contrary, they state that the estate-holder himself made khas collections for certain period of the suit land. Both the Courts below have come to a finding that, in fact, there was a lease though in law there was not. The learned Munsif came to a very clear finding that after the execution of the lease, there was given delivery of possession to the defendants who, in pursuance thereof, entered upon the tenure and made collections. The plaintiff, however, adduced no evidence to show what, was the amount collected by them. 3. The following questions of law arose out of the issues joi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1953Ori293; 19(1953)CLT338
Narasimham, J.1. This is an application under Section 66 (2), Income-tax Act praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus on the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state a case for the decision of this Court.2. The material facts are these: The Orient Fast Colour Dye Works, Cuttack, is a partnership firm carrying on the business of dyeing cotton yarn. There were seventeen partners in the firm two of whom were Sri Nikunja Kishore Das and Sri Dhananjay Lenka. While assessing the said firm in respect of its income during the calendar year 1946 the Income-tax Officer included in the total profits a sum of Rs. 3249/- and Rs. 2437/- said to have been paid as remuneration to Sri Nikunja Kishore Das and Sri Dhananjay Lenka respectively. On appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Income-tax, maintained the assessment made by the Income-tax Officer and dismissed the plea taken by the petitioners to the effect that the said remuneration was paid to the said two partners not in their individual ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1953Ori99; 18(1952)CLT207
ORDERNarasimham, J. 1. This revision is against an order under Section 145, Cr. P. C., passed by the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Rayagada declaring the opposite party to be entitled to possession of six plots of land in village Rachavikrampur and forbidding disturbance of such possession until eviction in due course of law. A revision petition filed before the Additional Sessions Judge of Jeypore under Section 437, Cr. P. C., was unsuccessful. 2. Village Rachavikrampur had been granted as Mokhasa by the Maharaja of Jeypore in favour of an ancestor of the opposite party and the last Mokhasadar was one Sivaramaraju. Petitioner Kamaraju is his own brother. Sivaramaraju died sometime in 1942 issueless and the petitioner alleged that his own son Nilakantam had been adopted by Sivaramaraju prior to his death. His case, therefore, is that his son Nilakantam as the adopted son of Sivaramaraju continues to be the Mokhasadar of the village and as such is in possession of all the lands in that v...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori318
Jagannadhadas, C.J.1. These four proceedings arise out of rules issued against certain persons for having committed contempt of this Court by publication of certain news items and articles in newspapers. To elucidate the background of these proceedings, it is necessary to state a few preliminary facts.2. In the month of April, 1951, there were examinations held at Cuttack by the Utkal University for the 'M. B. B. S. degree. These proceedings arise out of examinations for the 1st year M. B.B. S. students. The Board of Examiners submitted their results to the Syndicate on the 21st of April. The Vice-Chancellor of the University had information two days earlier, that is on the 19th April, that some questions in the written paper for the examination in Anatomy of the said 1st M.B.B.S. held on the 9th April, had leaked out. At a meeting of the Syndicate on the 21st April, the inform-mation received about the leakage of the question in the written Anatomy paper was considered by the Syndicat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori281; [1952]22ITR220(Orissa)
Narasimham, J.1. This is an application under Sub-section (3) of Section 29 of the Orissa Agricultural Income-Tax Act, 1947 against an order of the Revenue Commissioner refusing, to state a case for the decision of the High Court in respect of the assessment of the petitioner of agricultural income-tax for the year 1947-48.2. The petitioner is the proprietor of the impartible estates of Khallikote, Ataganda and Biridhi. On 26-5-49, the Agricultural Income-Tax officer of Ganjam made an assessment on the total agricultural income of the petitioner for the year 1947-48 as estimated by him. Against that order, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 25 of the Act before the Collector of Agricultural Income-Tax, Orissa, who dismissed the appeal and confirmed the assessment on the 6th March, 1950. The petitioner then filed a revision petition under Section 23of the Act before the Revenue Commissioner who rejected this petition. Then he applied to him under Sub-section (2) of Section 29 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori258; 18(1952)CLT276
ORDERNarasimham, J.1. This revision is against the conviction of the petitioners for certain forest offences committed in Bamra State sometime in July 1949, and the sentence of fine passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Kuchinda. Their appeal against the conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Sessions Judge of Sambalpur.2. Village Lepaikani, Babejore and Laidaguna in Bamra State form part of Sadharan forest of the State. It is alleged that the petitioners felled some green trees of the reserved species from these villages and thereby committed an offence under Rule 43 (a), (b), (f), & (g) of the Rules for the Preservation and management of the Bamra State forests, including Zamindari Areas. It was further alleged that they prepared the land for cultivation within the protected forest area of village Laidaguna and thereby committed an offence under Rule 8 (I) (i) of the said Rules.3. The main, point of law Urged by Mr. Ray on behalf of the petitioners, is that with the merger...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori359
Das, C.J. 1. This is an application by the Petitioner who is a nominated fellow of the Utkal University, made under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ in the nature of Quo Warranto as against the Vice-Chancellor and certain fellows of the Utkal University, challenging the election of some of them to the Senate of the University in the following circumstances :2. The application arises out of the requirement in Section 12 of the Utkal University Act, which provides for the compulsory retirement of one-fifth of the elected Fellows of the Senate in rotation at the end of each year. The names of the persons who have to be retired are determined by the process of balloting, to be conducted by the Vice-Chancellor, as provided in the Statutes framed by the Senate under the University Act. The names of those persons who were to retire by the end of December, 1952, were in fact determined by the process of balloting carried out by the then Vice-Chancellor. Thereupon a fresh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1953Ori3; 19(1953)CLT81
Narasimham, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order of the Subordinate Judge of Berhampur scaling down the decretal amount payable by the respondents-judgment-debtors to the appellants-decree-holders, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 10 of the Orissa Money Lenders Act.2. The original loan that was advanced to the respondents' predecessor-in-interest was only Rs. 2,000 based on two promissory notes for Rs. 1,000 each dated 1-9-28 and 5-10-28. In due course, fresh promissory notes for the principal and interest due were executed by the debtor on 1-9-31 and 21-7-34. The last promissory note was for a sum of Rs. 3,647-3-4. Two payments of Rs. 100 on 19-7-37 and Rs. 800 on 12-7-40 were made by the debtor and then the creditor instituted a suit (O. S. 48 of 1942) in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Berhampur for the realisation of the balance of the debt with interest. The suit was eventually compromised and a compromise decree for Rs. 7,000 was passed directing the payment...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1953Ori153
Jagannadha Das, C.J.1. These applications were previously heard on the 21st and 22nd of October and we pronounced orders on 27-10-52 (See AIR 1953 Orissa 49) granting to the applicants one of the prayers which they made in their applications viz., a direction for the issue of copies of certain documents, which the learned Magistrate held the applicants not to be entitled to. We felt that in the light of the additional material that may be available to the applicants on getting those copies it would be desirable to hear further arguments with reference to the legality of the searches which was the second question that was raised. We accordingly directed that the applications should be posted for further hearing. They have therefore come up again before us and we proceed to consider the question of the legality of the searches.2. It is necessary to note at the outset that when the applications were first heard on the 21st October, the advocate for the petitioners sought to put forward an...
Tag this Judgment!