Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jan-31-1957
Reported in : AIR1957Ori121; 23(1957)CLT134
Narasimham, C.J.1. The petitioner is a private motor transport company which was formerly plying stage carriage vehicles on the Raj Athgarh-Narasinghpur route. The Regional Transport Authority, Cuttack, refused to renew its permit and granted the same to the State Transport Authority of Orissa, over the said route. These two petitions have been filed against this order and they are dealt with in one judgment.2. The facts which are either admitted, or are clear from the affidavits filed by the parties, may be shortly stated as follows:Eight permits of the petitioner for the aforesaid route were . renewed for a period of three years. The permits expired on the 30th September, 1956. On the 24th July, 1956 the petitioner made an application to the Regional Transport Authority, Cuttack, accompanied by the prescribed fee, for renewal of the permits for a further period of three years from 1st October; 1956 under Section 58 (2) of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act. On the 9th September, 1956, how...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Feb-04-1957
Reported in : AIR1957Ori240; [1957]8STC749(Orissa)
Narasimham, C.J. 1. These are applications by Messrs, orient Paper Mills Ltd., against the orders of the Member (C. T.) Board of Revenue, in revision, rejecting their prayer for grant of refund under Section 14 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (Orissa Act XIV of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in respect of sales tax realised from them for the quarters mentioned below:OJC No.Quarter ending.Date of assessment including inter-State sales.Date of re-assessment u/s. 12 (7) (in respect of local sales only)Date of order on appeal against assessment noted in col. 3.Date of order on revision against appeal order noted in col. 5.Amount of re-fund claimed.1234567 Rs.as.ps.184/5531-3-5026-6-5019-12-5127-1-5127-6-5134,30950185/5530-6-5023-11-5019-12-5131-1-5127-6-5195,81930186/5530-9-5029-9-5119-12-5129-2-52...135,25000187/5531-12-5029-9-5119-12-5129-2-52...137,61370188/5531-3-5129- 9-5119-12-6129-2-52...144,853002. The petitioners paid the taxes in due course but when they came to kno...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jul-25-1957
Reported in : 24(1958)CLT148; (1958)IILLJ91Ori
Das, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging ex facie the legality of the order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta, dated 11 July 1955. The facts material for this application are:The petitioner company, having its head office at Rayagada in the district of Koraput, started work in or about the year 1936. In January 1951 a union of the workers of the aforesaid company was started under the name ' Shramik Congress.' A number of demands thereafter were formulated by this Congress regarding the pay and prospects of the workers and the company accepted the same on the advice of the Assistant Commissioner of Labour. In September 1951 the petitioner company dismissed and retrenched some workmen as a result of which the union served a notice on 15 October 1951 demanding their reinstatement, and threatened a strike in the event of non-compliance.The company eventually did not accept this demand and there was a strike on 19 October 1951. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Aug-20-1957
Reported in : AIR1958Ori11; 23(1957)CLT395; 1958CriLJ63
ORDERNarasimham, C.J.1. This is a petition in revision to quash proceeding under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code pending against the petitioners in the Court of a 1st class Magistrate of Boudh on the ground that the entire proceeding was initiated without jurisdiction.2. On 14-12-55 one Ramgopal Seth gave a written report at Manmunda police station in Boudh sub-division to the effect that some gold ornaments and cash were stolen from his house. The local police at first recorded merely a station-diary entry but on 16-12-55 they instituted a regular F. I. R. and took up the investigation of the case. After completing investigation a Final Report was submitted on 8-2-56 to the effect that though there was some suspicion against the petitioner Mahatair Prasad Agarwala the evidence was insufficient for submitting charge-sheet against him.The Final Report appears to have been received in the Subdivisional Magistrate's office on 13-12-56 but there was some delay in its being put up befo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Aug-30-1957
Reported in : AIR1958Ori1; 1958CriLJ59
Narasimham C.J. 1. This is a petition in revision against an interlocutory order dated 4-9-1956 passed by the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Khurda in a criminal case under Section 409, Penal Code, pending against the petitioner in his file.2. The learned Magistrate, at the request of the prosecution, called upon the petitioner-accused to produce his F. P. S. Register (Foodgrains Procurement Stock Register). This order appears to have been passed by the Magistrate under Section 94, Criminal Procedure Code, though that section was not expressly quoted in the order.The order was challenged as unconstitutional on the ground that it contravened the fundamental right guaranteed by Clause (3) of Article 20 of the Constitution, Reliance was placed mainly on a recent decision of the Supreme Court reported in M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra, AIR 1954 SC 300 (A), where it was held that the guarantee in Article 20(3) of the Constitution though against 'testimonial compulsion' would include protection...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Sep-03-1957
Reported in : AIR1958Ori7; 24(1958)CLT100
Mohapatra J. 1. Defendant No. 2 Budhi Jena being unsuccessful in both the Courts below has filed this second appeal against the confirming decision of Sri L. Panda, Subordinate Judge of Puri. The plaintiff has brought the suit for a declaration that the sale deeds dated 24th May, 1944 (Ext. A/1) and dated 9th June, 1949 (Ext. A) are invalid and inoperative against his interest. The suit property with an area 34, i.e., less than a gunth appertains to plot Nos. 287 and 289 of Khata No. 60 of Mouza Banarai. Undoubtedly this is the ancestral property of the plaintiff.The plaintiff was absent at Rangoon for a number of years during which period the plaintiff's wife Nila Dei executed the first sale deed dated 24th May, 1944 (Ext. A/1) in favour of defendant No. 1 for herself and as guardian of her two minor sons. The second transaction (Ext. A) is by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendant No. 2. The plaintiff's main attack is that the transaction in favour of defendant No. 1 by Nila, his wif...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Nov-21-1957
Reported in : AIR1958Ori87; [1958]9STC31(Orissa)
G.C. Das, J.1. This is a reference under Section 24 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (Orissa Act XIV of 1947) (Hereinafter referred to as the 'Local Act') for a determination of the following question of law :'Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case, the transaction between the petitioners and Messrs Paluram Dhandhania of Raigarh is exempt for levy of sales tax by the State of Orissa under Article 286 of the Constitution.'2. The petitioners are registered dealers within the meaning of the local Act, and submitted their return before the Sales-tax Officer, Balangir Patna, for the quarter ending 30-6-1951. In the return filed by them, they claimed a deduction of Rs. 1,04,212-7-0 representing the value of certain quantity of jute despatched to some jute mills in Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal, outside the State of Orissa under instructions from Messrs Paluram Dhandhania of Raigarh in Madhya Pardesh.The Sales-tax Officer rejected the petitioners' claim on the ground that the i...
Tag this Judgment!